User talk:Walkerma

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortcut:
WP:V0.5CT

This is Martin Walker's discussion page.

I'm busy right now, so I may not be as active as I would like. Soon I will be travelling, until mid-June, and may not have good internet access till I get back.

Archives Archive1 — Archive2 — Archive3 — Archive4 — Archive5 — Archive6 — Archive7 — Archive8 — Archive10

/Archive11 (July 2006) - lots of 0.5 and bot stuff, assigning topic priorities, B-P House, Bhumibol Adulyadej

/Archive12 (August 2006) - Validation/Wikicite, WP:Anglicanism, Wikimania, V0.5, lab glassware, school counselor, Regis Philbin, Wikisort, KLF.

/Archive13 (September 2006) - Bupropion, Version 0.5, Laboratory glassware, m:Wikicat, Regis Philbin, Chemical sources, WPCD2.

/Archive14 (October 2006) - WP:CITE discussion, The Magic Christian, WVWP multiplication scale, phosphorus chlorides, MartinBotII, distillation, WP Weekly, natural disaster

/Archive15 (November 2006) - iPod article, lead(II) nitrate, SourceForge repository, 0.5 biglist, Nofollow "bugs", MartinBotII, CaCl2, 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, 0.5 icon in articles.

/Archive16 (December 2006 - February 2007) - 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, African leaders, Futurama template, MartinbotII, "clear", WVWP, Tl halides, assessment criteria, V0.5.

/Archive17 (March 2007 - May 2007) - Indium halides, Compressed fluid, Version 0.5, renoms of GAs, IRC for WVWP and for Version 0.7, kids version, problems reviewing for V0.7, Chemical substance, dBpedia, search engines.

Discussion

Contents

[edit] Unsolved problems in biology, chemistry, and medicine nominated for deletion

Hi Walkerma,

the articles unsolved problems in biology, unsolved problems in chemistry, and unsolved problems in medicine have again be nominated for deletion. Maybe you find some time at the meeting to comment on the discussion pages Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unsolved problems in biology (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unsolved problems in chemistry, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unsolved problems in medicine 2.

Thanks, Cacycle 00:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :-) Cacycle 04:01, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reference tool

Hi Martin

I stumbled on this at Template:Cite_journal#Useful links. Thought you might be interested.

Quite peeved that some random admin deleted the images containing my endnote settings. I think there is a wider applicability outside our wikiproject too. Any advise? --Rifleman 82 02:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

(Answering here to maintain thread) Wow, that's really useful! I was waiting to see people inside WP do that, but no one has! I think that formatting the cites properly has actually slowed down my WP input of chemistry a lot, because you spend longer entering the citations than you do writing the content. Thanks a lot! I'll start using it immediately!
I've also been meaning to mention to you, I stumbled across [Zotero] recently, which is a broader tool for doing this sort of thing. It claims to be an open-source, not-for-profit version of an EndNote type system, but with easy use on websites (such as WP). It's developed by a group of academics, with US govt. support. I've downloaded it, and successfully imported a few refs., but I confess I had trouble getting the cites into the proper format for WP (but then I've only just started with it). Walkerma 03:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Aluminium chloride.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Aluminium chloride.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 09:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted SVG

Well, it's really an issue with a recent change to how MediaWiki handles images. See the Commons Village Pump and Bug 10128. It should be back by now. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 22:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Held noms

Well, I had a spare hour (or three :P) and I gave a full overhaul to the Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations/Held nominations page, merging it with Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations/Held Article Discussions, merging the content of both pages, updating instructions, etc, etc, etc. Mind having a look to see how it looks? Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 00:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

All right, check the sandboxes now. How do they look? Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 04:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Sure, no problem. Now, I've got a favor to ask myself... ;) Have a look at Wikipedia:Flagged revisions. How useful do you think that process/software extension can be to the 1.0 project? Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 04:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] script

Walkerma, I've added those 3 projects to the assessment script. –Outriggr § 03:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wrong assessment

Hi there. I notice you updated Talk:Joseph Haydn with the FA-class assessment, but as far as I can tell, the article is not FA-class and hasn't passed FAC. I see you were just copying the assessment someone put in another box, so it is an understandable mistake. Carcharoth 16:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Now, for something completely different...

Hello, Martin. I guess I have to ask you a favor completely unrelated to WP:1.0. I currently have Tropical cyclone on FAC, and I was wondering if you could go over it and give it a copyedit, to fix any glaring things you may find there. The data should all be there, it just needs fresh eyes to see things that may be plain wrong. If you could do that, I'd greatly appreciate it. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 22:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dylan - Vital Article?

Hi Walkerma, I replied to your posting at [[1]] regards Mick gold 15:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1.0

I will definitely keep an eye over there. Sorry if I have been a little silent - but a good chunk of the articles awaiting review in the arts section I nominated, so waiting for a better chunk to come in for me to hammer out. But will keep those pages on watch for any questions/developments. --Ozgod 04:41, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding WP:Core COTF, I nominated 3 articles, but frankly I don't have much time to work on them, even if they were to be selected. :( I'll try keep it updated when I get the chance. Have fun to wherever it is you're going. Cheers! MahangaTalk 02:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the wishes. I'm all right, just busy as hell, as I have a full load during summer school, which I took so I can take some electives next semester. Enjoying meatspace helps too. I'll probably be "more back" (whatever that means :P) after next week, and I'll keep an eye on V0.7 in the meantime. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 18:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1.0 team

Sorry for the delay in responding. I'll keep up with developments at 1.0 as best I can, but might be a bit late in responding if anything happens Sunday morning. John Carter 18:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Philately WikiProject

You are listed as a participant in the Philately WikiProject. Today I have created an inactive list consisting of those participants who have not made any philatelic edits for more than six months. I was going to use a 3 month cut off point but felt generous. You may be one of those editors, so if I have moved you and you want to remain an active participant, please forgive me, and move your name back from the inactive list to the active list. If you are still active on Wikipedia but are inactive in philately I hope there is no harm done in listing you as inactive. We really need more active participants for all philatelic articles. The Philately Portal has been running for some time and I am doing occasional updates, Postage stamps of Ireland is a candidate for featured article (that would be the first philatelic article), and several of the redlinks have been filled but we need more activity so if you are around please participate. Otherwise thanks for the work you have done in the past. Cheers ww2censor 00:28, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I have been inactive in philately, mainly because my other activities have totally dominated my time. I also realised that I'm more of a straight stamp collector, and I like the deep knowledge of postal history that is needed here. I did try scanning a couple of stamps, but their colours came out terrible, so in the end I gave up! I am doing a copyedit of the FAC to polish it - the commas seem to go awry in several places - and I will leave some comments on the FAC. If you write any other FACs in the future, feel free to contact me for tasks like this, if you find my copyedits/comments helpful. Walkerma 05:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
PS: Please check my edits carefully, to make sure I didn't change the meaning from your original intent. There were one or two places where I interpreted things a little. Things I was unsure on were commented on at the FAC.

[edit] Re Rasputin

Thanks for your kind words. Unfortunately, my professional and personal life have both undergone serious changes, which means I don't have much time to wiki anymore. I have some limited time today and I'll see what I can do. Errabee 10:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Geordie

You are a geordie smackhead and Sunderland has a far better history and population than newcastle. We will also beat you in november. 81.132.77.133 14:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Hadaway man! Walkerma 00:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You helped choose carbon dioxide as this week's WP:ACID winner

 Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week carbon dioxide was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help.

Spamsara 22:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Postage stamps of Ireland FAC

Again thanks for your review and comments. I have "done" everything you suggested and left detailed comments on the FAC page. I really appreciate your detailed suggestions and have attempted to be as detail orientated in fixing the problems as you were in suggesting fixes. Cheers ww2censor 04:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

That was quick. Thanks for the support. ww2censor 05:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
The other reviewer User:Pagrashtak came back today but still has a few issues that I really don't know what to do with. Perhaps you could offer some advise in regard to his two outstanding comments. I think I have picked up all the ndashes he sees (actually I think I introduced several more new ones with the new inline citations). He still has issues: "The lead is insufficient. There are too many headings and subheadings for the current text. For example, "Postage dues" has many one-sentence subheadings." I tightened up the "Stamp issuing authorities" by removing the bold titles and in the "Postage dues" section I have created two bold group headings (not TOC headings) and taken away nearly all of the paragraphs for the whole section. I could write much more for many of the sections as there are books complete books on many of them but the article is already long at 39kb. What do you think? Regarding the lead I could add some more text as précis of what follows; I think that is what he wants but he is not very explicit, so I am a little bit lost. The lead was shorter with an "introduction" section starting with the 2nd para, but that felt just too short. So an expended lead section is available for comment in my sandbox. I appreciate any advise you can offer as FAs seem to be in your area of interest. TIA ww2censor 01:28, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
When I first glanced at your remarks, I missed the sandbox version, and I did a little copyedit of the actual lead. I was scratching my head thinking how to expand the lead, but your sandbox version solved the problem nicely. I think there were some parts that are unimportant in the lead section (the failed essays and all the details of the postal stationery), so I did a major copyedit, but I think the general idea is excellent. I'm pretty tired so my copyediting skills may be compromised, please check my edits carefully and feel free to revert.
I would suggest that you request a little more detail from Pagrashtak, who seems a pretty reasonable person, and offer the sandbox version as a possible longer lead section - see if he/she likes it. I'm going to be offline for a couple of days. Cheers, Walkerma 07:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Since my last post here, I have done a lot of extra work based on other reviewers comments and maybe it is near sufficient support by most reviewers to pass. Thanks for your support. ww2censor 05:39, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

(de-indent) Just a quick thank you for participating in the Postage stamps of Ireland FAC. Your input was very useful and I have learned a lot from the process. Whether you raised issues, assisted with some cleanup, opposed or supported the article, thanks again for all you do for Wikipedia and especially thanks for the cocktail though I would prefer a Guinness instead but will have some real ones in September in Ireland. Cheersww2censor 15:36, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] July 2007 GAC backlog elimination drive

A new elimination drive of the backlog at Wikipedia:Good article candidates will take place from the month of July through August 12, 2007. There are currently about 130 articles that need to be reviewed right now. If you are interested in helping with the drive, then please visit Wikipedia:Good article candidates backlog elimination drive and record the articles that you have reviewed. Awards will be given based on the number of reviews completed. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the drive's talk page. Please help to eradicate the backlog to cut down on the waiting time for articles to be reviewed.

You have received this message either due to your membership with WikiProject: Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. --Nehrams2020 23:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I would love to help

(This is a copy of what I just posted to my own talk page)

It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness. I would love to be a part of thw Wikipedia 1.0 team. I have been thinking "All of the articles have been written, so I don't really know how to improve the Wikipedia at this point", and this gives me a chance to make Wikipedia a better place. Samboy 23:33, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Release version inclusions

Hi, with this edit you said you passed 10 articles, but it doesn't show in the talk pages of these articles; they all say they are nominees. Could you please look at them again? Thanks! Errabee 08:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Gosh, I must've been tired! I removed some I didn't review from the list, and then I forgot to update talk pages on others! I'll fix it after work today. Thanks for finding that, and I apologize for the mistake. Walkerma 12:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the rating

Thanks for the Wikipedia 0.7 pass on the vacuum article - I put a lot of work into it. I've been disheartened by a lot of attacks from the immature folk, and it's nice to get a pat on the back now and then. It motivates me to do some more work on it, especially in the measurement section.--Yannick 00:24, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thank you for the warm 1.0 wikiproject welcome. I will do my best to make wikipedia ever better as time permits :).petze 11:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] reviews

Hi walkerma. How can we question the quality of an article which has already been accepted? Can we ask for a re-review or something of the sort? Miskin 19:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. I wanted to know because I often run into high-importance low-quality articles which have been already included in one of the versions. It's true, although I've nominated many articles I haven't had the courage to proceed with reviews yet. Miskin 17:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Philatelic FAs

Actually while mooching around the FAs, after the promotion of Postage stamps of Ireland, I discovered that Mail was an FA from April 2004 until it was demoted in May 2006. The reason given was that it mainly had no references. Maybe it is not too far from being capable of promotion again. What do you think? I am prepared to work on it if you thought it is achievable. Cheers ww2censor 03:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I certainly think it's achievable, and it's also a major topic - well worth doing. It will be quite a bit of work, though - are you prepared to do that? I can't work too much on anything but WP:V0.7 these days, and a little chemistry, but I'd be happy to do a proof read + copy edit as I did for the Ireland article. Walkerma 03:59, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Let me see if anyone else will get involved and I will get back to you when/if it progresses any further. I still need to look it over properly before committing myself to it. I also need to be sure I have the resources to quote reliable references as much philatelic refs are not online. Thanks ww2censor 04:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Philatelic assessments

I saw you name mentioned on the Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Using the bot page and wondered if you can assist me. I would like to add assessments to the Philately WikiProject. Is this something you can assist with? We already have a project banner {{Philately}} that might be modified to include assessments and classes but it all looks a bit intimidating to me. Cheers ww2censor 00:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I can help - but I'd like to wait till I get home (I'm at a conference in Boston), my internet contact and my time are rather iffy at the moment. Walkerma 03:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Sure, wait until you get home. This is not an urgent issue. I will be around for the next 2 weeks until I go to London & Dublin for about 10 days. Thanks ww2censor 04:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Noticed your test template on Rowland Hill and wondered if you should add the "image-needed=" parameter. Nested works as I tested it. I presume several assessment pages need to be created and the bot needs to be set up to collect the statistics. If you need me to do anything, just ask. Cheers & thanks ww2censor 04:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't know about the image-needed parameter; if you or anyone else knows how to add that, please do. I don't want to tinker with the template, I'm out of my depth there! Walkerma 02:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
We have just been working on the {{WikiProject Ireland}} and I know that it includes an "image-needed" parameter that generates this page. Maybe that template will give you a clue how to modify this one. Otherwise it looks good and ready to go. I believe Stan is away, so he will be unlikely to post a comment soon. Cheers ww2censor 02:50, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Should we wait till Stan returns? I know he's a stalwart of WP:Philately. Walkerma 03:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't mind waiting but maybe we can have things pretty much ready, though Stan does not seem to have been doing many philatelic edits of late. Whatever you think is ok with me as there are so few of us doing any philatelic Wikiwork. One question. Do you know if there is a way to see the traffic to particular pages, in particular the Portal:Philately. Thanks ww2censor 03:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
OK, I'll wait till I have a bit of time - or else you're welcome to move it to the official template yourself if you wish. I will also try to help a bit with assessments. Be aware that the two articles I tagged have already been found by the bot, and the Philately project is now on the bot's main list! See for example these statistics. Regarding the Philately Portal, this information is available via the toolserver (I think), but it would require writing something especially to find that information. We have a bot being written (hopefully) for the 1.0 project which may be able to retrieve such information, as part of its larger work - I'll keep your request in mind in case an opportunity arises. In the meantime, I tagged it for del.icio.us and saw that two other people have the portal bookmarked on delicious. Based on my experience, I'd say this was not spectacular, but it is decent; probably for every 2 people bookmarking on delicious there are 200 bookmarking on Firefox/IE, I'd say. The chemistry portal has 13 others, but I have promoted this (featured) portal on several occasions in prominent places and I may not be alone. Walkerma 05:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

(deindent) So, Stan has indicated his non-objection to having philatelic assessments, but I suppose it will be up to you and me to actually do the assessment for the time being. Do you think you could finalise the template? If possible add the image-needed parameter otherwise I will ask another user who helped on another template to look at it. Just let me know if you want me to do that. Cheers ww2censor 14:35, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stable versions

Hello,

I've been trying to find out what kind of discussions are going on in the push for stable versions, or at least some form of validated article. Every essay, group, and wikiproject seems to be inactive. I saw your page, Wikipedia:Pushing to validation, so I figured I'd direct this question toward you: What exactly is happening in the discussions about release/stable versions? Is there a centralized place (a group or Wikiproject) where those who support the idea discuss? How is the idea progressing?

Thanks for your help, AdamBiswanger1 22:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I'm glad to see that that there is some progress on the frontier of article validation. I've always been a supporter of the idea, but I always thought it would be struck down by those who treasure the encyclopedia's open-access to all over its reliability. I'm glad to see another Wikipedian so close- I would certainly organize, or at least participate in some kind of wiki-meeting, but I haven't heard of a single person here who is an editor! Quite strange, considering this is one of the largest and most active websites in the universe. But thank you for your response, and I'm glad to see that we are one step closer to an authoritative encyclopedia. Thanks again, AdamBiswanger1 14:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know- I added myself to the mailing list. Regards, AdamBiswanger1 17:12, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alcohol

The Alcohol article received heavy editing today by new/unregistered users, which I noticed at WikiRage.com. The article may benefit from a good review. According to Wikipedia Page History Statistics, you are one of the top contributors to that page. If you have the time, would you please read over the article and make any necessary changes. Thanks. -- Jreferee (Talk) 06:15, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ayyavazhi

Hai,

You removed the article Ayyavazhi from this Wikipedia:Version 0.7/Core supplement page; and noted that it should be debated first. Where to? Th ediscussion page of the article is still a red link. Also this Ayyavazhi article is an important religion topic. - white dot...!!! 11:12, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The Version 0.7 core supplement is more or less a checking off page used for WP:V0.7, based on WP:CORESUP, which is itself a supplement WP:CORE, the Core Topics list. (Sorry about the Byzantine structure, that's what happens when you're short-handed!). The discussion should probably happen at either WP:CORE or at the Version 0.7 page- the latter is more active so I've set up a redirect there.
I really don't think that you will convince people that Ayyavazhi is on of the 300-400 most important topics belonging in an encyclopedia. Core Topics lists four articles in the Philosophy & Religion section - Mythology | Logic | Philosophy | Religion . In the supplement, we have Beauty, Buddhism, Christianity, Confucianism, Ethics, Free will, God, Heuristics, Islam, Judaism, Metaphysics, Soul, Spirituality, Mysticism, Taoism, Truth. I believe Hinduism was on the list too. So you need to convince us that Ayyavazhi is more important to the religious world than Hinduism, or Jesus, or Mohammad. We look at things like interwiki links and links in to assess article importance. I think it's very unlikely to make the list. However it IS very likely to pass for Version 0.7 - and that's the list that really matters. Walkerma 15:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
How ever Ayyavazhi is not known than Jesus and Hinduism in the religious world. But those articles (Jesus, Hinduism..) are some how under that list (in Miscellaneous section I think). So i feel Ayyavazhi may deserves a place there anywhere, at lease in the Miscellaneous. - white dot...!!! 14:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
The problem with the core lists is that we try to keep the number of articles the same. That means if you want to add one article, you need to remove another of lower importance. So we would need to delete Hinduism in order to include Ayyavazhi, which seems wrong to me. Walkerma 00:47, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Just to clarify, the list you edited was just a checklist for reviewing, and we generally freeze these anyway while reviewing (you can't review a "moving target"), the same applies to the Vital Articles list we are using. I looked over the article, and I've included it in Version 0.7. It seems very comprehensive, though perhaps rather heavy on references (better that than too light, though!). The main work remaining would seem to be improving the language, which is terribly ungrammatical in places, but I see that the league of copyeditors is working on that. Other than that, it looks like a very nice article, thanks for the nomination. Walkerma 01:54, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Why, to include Ayyavazhi, Hinduism should be removed? Buddhism is there, Jainism etc too. Dont't declare that Ayyavazhi is a part of Hinduism (though I believe so to some extend). Ayyavazhi seems seperate from Hinduism and relation of Ayyavazhi and Hinduism is similar to that of Jainism to Hinduism and Buddism to Hinduism. See the large number of reference to support this, in the article. i personally feel that in this sense Ayyavazhi deserves a place there in Vital articles and core article lists too.

Any way thanks very much for its inclusion in release version 7. As mentioned in that template will Ayyavazhi be released with all the subsequent release versions?

Also, can you pls tell when this version will be released and how i can get a copy? - white dot...!!! 10:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Then, regarding copy-edit to improve the language of the article, it seems labouriouse; The article is under request for copyedit before 7 months and is still there and is the first in the list. (Some others too seems waiting for the copy-edit to be done and immedietly to nominate it as a featured article candidate.) My be because of the vast reference, users may find it difficult to work on. Is there any other ways to get it copy-edited quickly? Myself's is a low-quality english; otherwise i may've done it. Can you give some suggestions. Thanks once again - white dot...!!! 10:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
It will probably be released next year. A lot depends on us getting a bot written, until that is done it's hard to predict. Yes, it will be in all future general releases from now on. As for the copyediting, that is a major task for any article of such length, but it tends to be even harder if you're not familiar with the topic and the "heavy" language. I may have a go at doing some copyediting this week for you - some of the mistakes are very simple (singular/plural things like "these men says") and I can hopefully catch most of these. I'd then ask you to read over my "corrected" version to make sure I didn't introduce any new factual errors. Walkerma 15:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Kindly give your suggestions for the following things also, (those i wrote above you might not have noted.) Thanks very much for all other informations and helps

Why, to include Ayyavazhi, Hinduism should be removed? Buddhism is there, Jainism etc too. Dont't declare that Ayyavazhi is a part of Hinduism (though I believe so to some extend). Ayyavazhi seems seperate from Hinduism and relation of Ayyavazhi and Hinduism is similar to that of Jainism to Hinduism and Buddism to Hinduism. See the large number of reference to support this, in the article. i personally feel that in this sense Ayyavazhi deserves a place there in Vital articles and core article lists too. - white dot...!!! 17:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
The problem is in adding to a closed list - if you add one article you must remove one article to make room for it. Which religion article would you say is less important than Ayyavazhi? Jainism only has a few members today, but it has a very long history. Can you prove that Ayyavazhi is more important than Roman Catholicism (1.1 billion members) or even The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (13 million members)? It's not even worth worrying about, it's really a technicality whether or not it's in that list. What matters IMHO is that it will be on all future DVD releases. Walkerma 20:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
So if I understand your words correctly, the Ayyavazhi article will be in all the future DVD versions [which means not only in the succesive Version(s)0.7]. Ok Thanks for your kind information and co-operation. - white dot...!!! 12:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Potassium chloride

[2] Probably my bad while moving to {{chembox new}}. Sorry for the trouble. --Rifleman 82 16:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for updating the chemboxes - that's a great help! Walkerma 20:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP 1.0

Dear Martin, I will not be in France to the Wikipedia-Conference, so I will not hear your lesson there. About your german,: It is no problem not to speak german, but the Babelfish destroyed most of that you want to tell me (I really don't know what you want from me ;O( ), so I hope you can tell it in english again. Greetings from Berlin, -- Achim Raschka 20:55, 22. Sep. 2007 (CEST) (who speaks and writes a terrible english too) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.196.42.196 (talk) 18:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear Martin,
thank you, now I understand. I think the main problem in the german WP 1.0 and WP:DVD is, that those are two total different projects. WP 1.0 was in the german Wikipedia a project to print the whole Wikipedia on Paper and to organize that fom A to Z with the wikipedians and a stuff of professional publishers in our publishing business. That project is dead, there never was more than the idea and some initial thoughts and discussions.
what really is interesting for your work is the Wikipedia-DVD we are producing every year since 2004. There is no editorial pre-selection of the articles we use for the DVD and there is no project to organize it. The DVD is a product of Directmedia Publishing and is produced without help neede from the community. So this is the process: We take all articles from a given complete Dump and make a technical selection in using different filters. For example we filter all articles with a request for deletion, all with licence-problems and many more templates. Than of every article we go back to a version one month before the dump was made and filter technical with a selfproduced Karmascheme on users (we used a selfmade whitelist until last year, now we have a Karmatool based on the articlework and articlechange of every author) to the version with a highleveled Karma in the article history. This version will be on the DVD with all templates indicating NPOV, source-problems and so on.
So, why don't we use the community? For the first CD-version parts of the comminty helped in cleaning up all that articles we used for the CD in an outsourced Wiki - that were about 150.000 I think. This was a lot of work and more and more we thought that the product was not really Wikipedia. So we thought about altenate ways and the technical way was the result we got. Now the authors in tghe german Wikipedia work on their projects and we can get an archive-version every year with better and more articles from version to version. This year we will produce two different versions of the DVD: one standard compressed on one DVD with very small pictures (because it's so much stuff) and one version with 5 DVD and pictures in a higher quality as a premium version. Parallel we will mirror our whole project on our new Website http://www.zeno.org, where we can link it with all other projects we publish as different historical encyclopedia, a great collection of german literature and philosophical writings and a collection of 40.000 master pieces of international art. The next version will be there in a few days, at least at 1st og October, where you can use it. The result on zeno.org will be the same as on DVD.
I hope this may help you, Greetings again from Berlin, -- 89.196.42.196 08:12, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Roof construction

calling for tenders... can you take a look at the talk page for Roof and the above article and make comments/suggestions? Amandajm 16:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1.0 template

Hello, Martin,

Well, I've fixed the wording on the |v0.7=fail case. How do you think it sounds? Hopefully the wording is all right. However, the other two points are much harder to fix. The "This template was reviewed by WP:1.0" part is coded in a fixed part of the template; adding a switch to that would require a significant recode of the entire template, and I'd say it is beyond my abilities as a template hacker. I'd recommend to reword that boilerplate text instead.

As for the WPCD part, it can be fixed easily, but we would need to double-check all the WPCD-tagged articles and check whether they were in the old selection, or in the new one. (Are there cases where an article was in the old selection, but not in the new one? If that's the case, then things would get even more complicated!) If you'd like me to have a go at modifying the template, I can do that, but I don't know how to check all of the articles in the WPCD selection for the version in which they were originally released.

Hope that helps, and that everything is going well with you over there, Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 18:40, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assessment

Hey, I noticed you do assessments for articles in the Chemicals Wikiproject, and I was wondering whether you could assess this one article, Copper(II) hydroxide. I haven't been able to find anywhere to post a request for assessment. Could you help me out? Thanks, --Slartibartfast (1992) 22:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll try to get to this, sorry I've been so busy. I wanted to actually help you work on the article a bit, too. Walkerma 07:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, thanks. I'm not actually the main collaborator for that article, but I've had my share of discussions there... --Slarti (1992) 23:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Still wanting that assessment if you ever get the time... --Slartibartfast1992 21:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, man. I might get around to goind the stuff you listed in the weekend (yes, I have noticed that Chris edits once in a while). Anywho, thanks for the assessment and pointing that stuff out. Do you think that if we add those sections this would be a Good Article? --Slartibartfast1992 03:56, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

OK. I'll slowly improve it when I get time on weekends. Thanks for your time, --Slartibartfast1992 22:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP 0.7 Canadian provinces

Hi,

I noticed that in August, you gave all of the Canadian province articles a pass into WP 0.7, according to their articles' talk pages. I think this is great; however, I do not see them anywhere on the 0.7 release version list. Is this on purpose, or just an oversight? Green451 18:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I got very busy and never added the provinces to the list - I've done it now. Fortunately, we check the tags against the list so we'd have caught it, but it's better to catch the problems right away. Thanks, Walkerma 05:09, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Content review workshop

Walkerma, would you be interested in participating in a workshop on improving the content review processes on Wikipedia? There's a new project page at Wikipedia:Content review/workshop, which has been set up as a place to discuss FA, GA, PR, WikiProjects such as Military History, the League of Copyeditors, Wikipedia 1.0, and any other content review processes. These don't all work smoothly all the time, as I'm sure you know. We have some participants who have experience at FA and GA, and would like to get involvement from someone with knowledge of Wikipedia 1.0, too; your name was suggested by another editor as someone very familiar with Wikipedia 1.0. Would you have time to join the discussion? The project page summarizes the goals and scope of the workshop; there are some discussions on the talk page that you might find informative -- towards the end of the talk page participation expands somewhat and in the last few sections is some discussion of how we'd like to proceed. If you can find the time, we'd be glad to see you join that discussion. Mike Christie (talk) 22:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind me quoting you about this... Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 06:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Not at all! Thanks for letting me know, Walkerma 07:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP 1.0 bot

See User:VeblenBot/version1.0/Demotable for what I have right now. Where is the right place to discuss the way the score is calculated? — Carl (CBM · talk) 01:02, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

Hello, i have received your message. What I'm most interested in- well, I have knwoledge in history, geography, and language related articles, realted to Ukraine, as well as World history during World War I and II. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mona23653 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for November 2007

The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the December 2007 issue. Dr. Cash 01:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Belarusian article assessment

Due to the lack of projects that cover these articles, I have decided to create the Wikipedia:WikiProject Belarus. Anything that is in Category:Belarus is going to be covered by this WikiProject. I have created at template at {{WikiProject Belarus}} so articles can be assessed. I just need a bot to stick them all in articles in the category I mentioned above. Can this be done? I just hate it when good articles from this country could miss out a DVD appearance because of some project not wishing to rate them sufficiently. Thanks. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I've requested help on this, as I don't really know how to do this myself. In the meantime, could you perhaps put together a set nomination covering perhaps the top 20 Belarus articles? The ones we have included so far (that I know of) are:

Cheers, Walkerma 02:56, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

National emblem of Belarus and Constitution of Belarus is the other Belarusian articles that are listed as Featured. If you need articles on living people, the article on Alexander Lukashenko is a "Good Article." User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, these are useful suggestions. They don't have to be GA/A/FA to qualify, though that definitely helps - a B will qualify if it's on an important topic. Something like Hrodna would definitely be a candidate, though that article is only a good Start (or perhaps a weak B?) and it could certainly benefit from having some references. (See this analysis on cities.) Thanks, Walkerma 03:47, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No problem

I'm just trying to clear the list of stale proposals, Cheers. --Kevin Murray 02:37, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hierarchy subpage

I'm not yet sure how the subpage will work, but I'd like to keep the changes log relatively clean, so I refactored your comments. I hope that is okay. Geometry guy 13:16, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template Help

Hi,

I was working on {{WikiProject Southern California}} to try and do two things: 1) make the template list all Southern California articles automatically under the category of WikiProject California, and 2) go back and remove the redundant template for {{WikiProject California}}.

Before I can do the second, I need to finish the first. Currently, before the {{WikiProject Southern California}} template will jointly list something, the value "California" needs to be set to "yes." I am not a programmer, but I would like to get the template rewritten so it just places the articles in both wikiprojects. Can you help?

Thanks. --evrik (talk) 15:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

  • which version of the template would you suggest? --evrik (talk) 21:35, 18 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] hi hows it going

With the release version? Still interested in combining 1.0 with 2008 DVD Selection? We are getting quite a bit of demand for the 2007 Selection now but it takes 6 months to build up.. --BozMo talk 21:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I was just writing an email to you when I saw this come in! The short answer here is YES, definitely! We should probably talk some time soon - but I'm going away to my in-laws for Thanksgiving tomorrow morning. Walkerma (talk) 22:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ChemSketch

Hey Martin

Spoke to PC62 and he said you could tell me about the ChemSketch collaboration. I was dragging my feet about sending my agreement to the license terms. It's been a while and I thought it had fizzled out, but apparently it's still working. I'm still keen on participating. Let me know more? Thanks! --Rifleman 82 (talk) 15:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


(Copying over to my talk page, my reply there --Rifleman 82 (talk) 15:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC))

[edit] CFATS article

Hi, Martin. I saw your entry over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Law#CFATS_article. I don't know this area of law in particular, but I did tweak a couple things (corrected some terminology, added a fact or two, added a couple references) to try to help it along a bit. Good luck, and thanks for starting the article. --TJRC (talk) 04:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New straw poll at the content review workshop

Walkerma, I just wanted to update you on the current situation with the content review workshop, which you contributed to for a while. We have a proposal for automation of peer review, and it seems Gimmetrow is going to try to find time to write the bot code for that. Once he has something to show people we'll post more notifications so people can see what they think of the idea.

Since it will be some time before Gimmetrow gets to that, we're currently running another straw poll to identify the next topic, and I thought that you might be interested in participating in that, even if you decide not to get involved with the subsequent topic discussion. Please drop by to take a look if you have the time; the section is here. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 03:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] wp on dvd site

Can you tell me who runs the http://www.wikipediaondvd.com/ site? It has issues... I was attempting to buy a couple DVD's for Xmas presents, but alas, the site crashes when you try to pay! (It's fine up until that point). Cheers, -- phoebe/(talk) 06:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I will try again. -- phoebe/(talk) 19:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] syphilis

in your edit summary for the talk page of syphilis you mention that one section needs cleanup, but you don't mention what section it is. If you mention it on the talk page, it might get worked on. - Nunh-huh 03:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Wikipedia 1.0 Project

Since you are a member of the WP 1.0 editorial team, perhaps you can answer a question for me. Currently, the top third of the Talk:Johnny Cash page is filled with information about WP 1.0. Is it supposed to look like that? My understanding was that there was a simple template at the top of the page, along with other wikiproject templates, stating that the article had been chosen to be part of WP 1.0. As it is now, you have to scroll down through all of that "stuff" to get to the table of contents. Is there a way of limiting the amount of such information that appears on the page? Thanks for your time. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 18:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about this! Apparently, you were getting the main project talk page (WP:1.0) transcluded onto the page, instead of the template {{WP:1.0}}. I've never seen that happen before - I'm sorry it happened! It was just one colon that made all the difference! Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 04:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I noticed a similar situation yesterday, while doing some assessments, with most of the articles in Category:Unassessed-Class Irish Republicanism-related articles but did not know how to fix it even though the tag looks correct to me. Maybe you can look at that one. TIA Cheers ww2censor (talk) 04:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
You are certainly welcome, and I apologize for the lateness of my reply. I had no idea what had gone wrong, I only knew that something was definitely amiss! Thanks for your response, and for attending to the problem. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 05:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Renin

Martin, given this blog post I'm sure you'd be the most qualified person to expand remikiren (and the whole page renin inhibitor). JFW | T@lk 16:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, but that's another walkerma! Sorry, my name appears to be too common. I actually know very little about renin and that sort of thing. I'm planning on spending my January looking at some organic functional groups - much more up my alley. Have a great holiday! Walkerma (talk) 16:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Had me fooled. I thought that was you too! --Rifleman 82 (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lead(II) nitrate, back to FA?

Hi, Martin, I've copy-edited the lead(II) nitrate article from the Chemicals wikiproject, after it was recentely demoted from its FA-status. In this, you did not contribute to the voting process. Would you please be so kind as to now provide feedback in its now running FA re-candidacy? Wim van Dorst (talk) 19:16, 31 December 2007 (UTC).

Yes, I was away & offline for virtually all of last week, and busy before that - I wasn't even aware of this article losing FA status until I saw discussion on it today. I'll take a look tonight - when I'm not dancing the night away....! All the best for 2008, Walkerma (talk) 20:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Dance away, Martin. It's ten in the evening here, and we're going to open the champagne for a pre-drink. Good wishes for 2008! Wim van Dorst (talk) 21:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC).

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles January Newsletter

Happy New Year! Here is the latest edition of the WikiProject GA Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 04:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Philatelic assessment

Actually I had prepared the following page but as it is not quite finished, I had not linked it yet. If you want to finish it we can link it properly. There needs to be some importance guidelines added, other than that I think it is about finished. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 04:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

That's great! I just dashed off something "quick & dirty" - but I hoped that in time we would have something like this new page. Once you think it's ready we can update the project page as you see fit. Delete all of what I added if you think that's best! The links to categories are often overlooked, especially the importance one, but these can be handy. By the way, do you know why the log entries appear in the ToC for that new page? They don't link to anything, but they fill up the ToC. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 04:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Actually I just added it but it still has an "underconstruction" tag and, as I said above, need some importance guidelines. Maybe I will get to that over the weekend and ask you to review. I intended putting in a table something like one of these tables that we added to the Project Ireland assessment page so we could have four, (or more or less) different group examples with ratings for guidance. ww2censor (talk) 05:15, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes - the Irish example is excellent, one of the best I've seen. It's always best if people can see an example for importance. FYI, we'll be testing out a bot-based assessment scheme (based on three independent parameters) for WP1.0 in the next few days, I'll let you know how it works out for the philately articles. Walkerma (talk) 05:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Strangness with today's statistics: the stats produced here seem quite at odds with the assessments I made within the last few weeks. Perhaps you could give it the once over. When I view the unassessed articles there are 518, yet the stats say 411 and I know that I assessed several of the lists of birds on stamps as you can see from the log entry for February 14, yet these same articles still appear as on the unassessed listing today. I checked this within minutes of the bot updating the statistics page, so I don't understand what is happening. Any advise would be appreciated. And after I assess some more, the number of unassessed stays the same, leaving the just assessed articles still listed as unassessed but this only seems to affect lists class articles as it works fine for others, so there is something amiss with the way the list-class articles are not being recorded. I will ask someone else to have a look too. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 16:12, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I think I understand what's going on. List-Class was until fairly recently a non-standard tag used by some projects, but it was not recognised by the bot. We agreed a few weeks back to add make List-Class official policy. Oleg had to have a changeover point when he "switched on" the new code, and I guess that our project saw that happen today. If you look, right after the original stats were done, the bot did another edit to add another line to the table and to fix the stats. Hopefully the change is now complete and the stats will match up correctly (they now look right to me). If there is a persistent problem, please let me know and I'll alert Oleg. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 01:49, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
As I know you are not online all the time, I asked BHG to look at it (she helped with the WikiProject Ireland assessment template) and she did some work on it and it looks like it has now been fixed. So let's hope so. BTW, it was BHG who ran the bot manually to get the new stats. Thank and cheers. ww2censor (talk) 01:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Thanks for your support
Thank you SO MUCH for your support in my unanimous RFA. Take this cookie as a small token of my appreciation.--Jayron32|talk|contribs 05:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Workshop

Hi, I have started a bit of a workshop on {{chembox new}} here, may I invite you to help discuss the different parts of the box? Thanks. --(Beetstra)

Thanks a lot for this, great idea! I'm fairly busy, getting ready for the start of teaching on Monday, but I'll try and participate. Walkerma (talk) 17:23, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Selection bot

Your list was very helpful. I am defusing an emergency with the peer review page right now, and then I have a date with my wife later tonight. But I was able to make spreadsheets with the data from the projects you gave me, and they are done. All I need to do is to combine them into a master spreadsheet and add the spreadsheet code to do the calculations. I'm planning to work on it tomorrow. If you know how to program spreadsheets, I can just send you the raw data spreadsheets. — Carl (CBM · talk) 22:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I sent the email. If you have any problems let me knwo and I can convert the formats. In order to convert back to a wiki table, it will be easiest to save the spreadsheet as a CSV (comma separated) file, and then I can write a script to turn that into a table. — Carl (CBM · talk) 22:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Great to hear. Here are the column meanings: A - title. B- project. C- quality. D - importance, or "Unused" if the project doesn't have importance categories. E- incoming links from non-redirect articles (I believe; need to triple-check that with Emmanuel). F - interwiki links. G - hitcount statistic. — Carl (CBM · talk) 23:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
I think those stats from Henrik are different than the stats being used here. These are the ones Leon collects, and are based on a 1 in 1000 sample of pages being viewed. So a page with 880 views could easily show 0 in the stats being used here. I am not sure how Henrik is gathering hit counts, but switching to them shouldn't be hard if he is willing to release the data. — Carl (CBM · talk) 23:20, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I ran into Henrik on IRC today. He says he can make us a table of his data for all articles in a few days. — Carl (CBM · talk) 22:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

The current tests are generated by my bot VeblenBot, but they don't really need a bot at all. Mostly they just download data. I have registered SelectionBot in case we need a dedicated username to do the heavy work.
The data I sent you is cut off at a threshold of 27 on the multiplicative scoring system, with unused-importance counting worth 6. Emmanuel has data for all articles, although Leon's hitcount data is coarse. I can very easily run the script with the threshold set lower, but the data sets will be quite large. For example, with the threshold set to 10, there are about 80,000 articles in the output. — Carl (CBM · talk) 06:22, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Requesting input

Your input on the ideas presented at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject reform#Single Banner? would be very much appreciated. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 18:06, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Phosphorus trichloride.PNG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Phosphorus trichloride.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 08:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Workshop

No need to apologize; any time you can spare would be great, but I completely understand about having a lot else on your plate. One thing that you might be able to help with is a recommendation, though. Take a look at this post; we were thinking that we might be able to help an interested project get experience on taking an article to FA. The Countries project doesn't seem interested though, so I was wondering if you happened to know of a project with active editors that might be interested in such an idea. If you do, drop me a note -- we're going to give the Countries project another day or so and then try posting somewhere else.

Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 03:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 05:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rollback

Hi, Martin,

I have granted rollback rights to your account. I'm pretty sure you will only use it to "revert vandalism", and not to reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Hope it is helpful for you. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 05:28, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that should be useful at times! I'll only use it rarely, though, I think. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 05:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tool is now the Core Topics Collaboration

 You showed support for Tool at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Core topics/Core topics COTF. This article was selected as our collaboration of the fortnight. Hope you can help.

Just a reminder! Walkerma (talk) 03:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hydronium ions

I have looked at the news item and the paper and replied on my talk page to keep it in one place. --Bduke (talk) 00:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Comments requested, and visit

Not anywhere near Baltimore, unfortunately; it'd have been a pleasure to meet up, otherwise.

As far as the substantive points:

  • I'll take a look through the French list tomorrow. Personally, I still think the approach you're taking is too complicated—I think a more quality-oriented selection would be simpler, easier for the casual observer to understand, and produce a higher number of usable articles—but I suppose that's not really what you're looking for in the output to begin with.
  • I've responded on the talk page regarding FLs.

Cheers! Kirill 06:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I've gone through the French military history lists in some detail. The net effect of the selection—despite the motions about importance statistics—seems to have been simply to grab all the GA and higher articles. No B-Class article is currently selected, meaning that things like Napoleon I of France don't make it in (at least as far as we're concerned). I expect this is not going to be limited to French articles, for that matter; there's likely to be minimal deviation as far as the raw hit & link statistics are concerned, so the method used will effectively become a by-quality selection anyways (just one with an extremely high cutoff) for the entirety of MILHIST articles.
It would be interesting to see what effect double-tagging has on this, incidentally. How many MILHIST articles would be selected due to their importance to other projects, in other words? Kirill 14:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Great, thanks for looking at these. The selection of articles that are chosen for the test are not necessarily representative of all French MILHIST articles - we used a very crude formula for grabbing a few to look at by hand. The grabbing formula uses WikiProject importance rankings, but since MILHIST doesn't have these (I do understand why - we don't want to be adding "The Wikipedia War" to our articles) it simply grabbed the better articles. But this is exactly why we need a complex formula for making selections, since we need to generate importance rankings using other parameters. We also have to cope for some projects having importance, but others not; I did that by ranking all of this particular list as Mid-Class importance.
We will certainly look at the double tagging aspct. However, I do expect differences. For example, the Quebec project may consider Rutherford Mid-Class, but Physics may rank him Top-Class.
So what you should consider is: GIVEN THIS SELECTION, did the bot sort the list into a reasonable order? I'd love to hear your opinion on this. Thanks! Walkerma (talk) 16:23, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, the ordering looks pretty good; the bot seems to do a decent job of filtering into at least broad groups of more importnat versus less important articles. The specific pairwise ordering of individual entries is probably open to debate, but isn't really something that should be a practical concern anyways. Kirill 16:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] #wikichem 2/19 log

My connectivity wasn't connected today, so I couldn't log the IRC meeting. Do you have (or know if anyone else has) a saved log of it? DMacks (talk) 21:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Image:Alcohol general.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Alcohol general.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 02:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 06:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Meetup/Montreal

Date is set for May 3rd 2008 and Buffet La Stanza is the proposed location. Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 05:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unrelated 2 Wiki

Hey, I know this has nothing to do with Wikipedia, but, I am a singer/songwriter/music mixer(producer). Would you by any chance know anyone who I can give my demo to? I know I'm going out on a limb, but, this has always been my dream and I've been working on it for a long time. Thanks for your help---¤÷(`[¤*M*¤]´)÷¤- 04:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] to coordinate acs

Please email me. DGG (talk) 00:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

You should have got my email, which I'd already seen before I sent this. Thanks a lot! I never realised you were active on WP! We should have a chat some time, I think we'd have a lot of ideas to share. I'm replying here, because that's what you request on your user page. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 03:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Looking for a template

Do you know of a template that indicates the language to be used in an article, such as American English v British English? I recall seeing something like that on a page but cannot find it. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 03:02, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I was stuck too, till I did a search via AWB of all templates that linked to the article on American English - bingo! Try {{British-English}} or {{American-English}}. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 04:02, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I thought you might know. ww2censor (talk) 04:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CAS and Wikipedia

Congratulations on the CAS-Wikipedia link-up announced here. That looks good. One thing though. Were you aware of the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology/Proposals#Partnership with ACS? Carcharoth (talk) 18:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

WOW, congratulations! -- Avi (talk) 20:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! I appreciate the mention of the MCB project discussion, too, I was unaware of that. Walkerma (talk) 03:54, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hey Martin

Just saying hi and that I appreciate all your work on 1.0. Also that I want to make it clear that my suggestion to have this 1.0-style-issues page on some somepage of 1.0 isn't an attempt to volunteer the time of anyone on your project, or to pull you guys into any contentious issue. (I just became aware that citation style had a long-running edit war in October on WP:CITE, and it's not hard to imagine someone thinking that's a relevant issue for this project.) My only concern with that suggestion was to be absolutely neutral ... if one project speaks up and the others don't, even after I've notified all the people at WP:WPMoS and WP:ASSIST of the project, then it's hard to see how people can complain if there's a (probably false) impression that any such arguments are being conducted on someone else's "turf". - Dan Dank55 (talk) 15:01, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Council roll call

Hi there. You are receiveing this message because your name appears on the WikiProject Council participants list. The WikiProject Council is currently having a roll-call; if you are still interested in participating in the inter-project discussion forum that WT:COUNCIL has become, or you are interested in continuing to develop and maintain the WikiProject Guide or Directory, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Participants and remove the asterisk (*) from your name on the list of participants. If you are no longer interested in the Council, you need take no action: your name will be removed from the participants list on April 30, 2008.

Melon‑Bot (STOP!) 22:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Random Smile!

WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

-WarthogDemon 03:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Contact re Assessment

Hey Martin, I tried to email you through the wiki function but having trouble. Could you try emailing me so we can exchange info. Cheers. 03:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April GA Newsletter

The April issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is now available. Dr. Cash (talk) 04:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Edit. 1.0

I joined in July 2007 :) // A Raider Like Indiana 14:34, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Joining the 1.0 Editorial Team

Dear Martin, I just wanted to ask how does one join the 1.0 Editional Team? I am very interested in becoming a member. Please respond back. Sincerely, Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 22:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Welcome from the 1.0 Editorial Team

Hey, thanks for welcoming me (finally)! I'd like to help anything that I can, just tell me the choice that I can pick for my participation. Oh yeah, almost forget. I'm will quite busy start from here so if a cannot reply quickly your message just pardon me okay? Ivan Akira (talk) 10:38, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it's best for me to be expanding & improving weaker core articles and reviewing articles for possible inclusion the next DVD. Actually, I'd interested in writing Bot, but how can I get the information about it (or from who)? I'm looking forward to it. Ivan Akira (talk) 10:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Now I already finish my test (the government test), but there still another phase of test waiting me. In this busyness, let see what can I do for Boat article. Okay? Ivan Akira (talk) 08:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! I've kept you in my prayers, as you asked, and I hope that you did well. Just work on the boat article once you've got time. I'm quite busy too, but I hope to do some work on boat myself this weekend. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 08:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome... But hey, thanks too (that you prayed for me)! I have made fix (or minor change) to Boat article. But, start from now I'm back in busy again so I will think what is the best for that article. Ivan Akira (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Welcome from the 1.0 Editorial Team

Thanks for the welcome. I'd like to help in any way I can. --Shruti14 t c s 17:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Difference between Chemical Compound and Molecule

Since I saw that you are the member of WP:Chem, I am likely to know what is the difference between Chemical compound and Molecule trully? Actually I already make a page that goes for this topic but in Indonesian language (that you maybe don't understand) to explain the difference for my friend. But I am encouraged to find the real truth about the difference, can you help me since I know that you expert in chemistry topic. Thanks! Ivan Akira (talk) 11:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Compound list

Hi Walkerma,

I saw your post on depthfirst about chempedia and was wondering if the comprehensive list of chemical compounds has been created yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdb003 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reference to 1.0 in WP:Lead

WP:Lead has a sentence that is over 1 year old: "For the planned Wikipedia 1.0 — a static version of Wikipedia distributed on CD, DVD, or paper — one recommendation, not currently implemented, is that the articles will consist of just the lead section of the web version. Summary style and news style can help create a concise intro that works as a stand-alone article." That sentence is a bit surprising; I'm wondering if it's true, and if so, to which articles it would apply. (Standard disclaimer: feel free to reply here, on my page, or not at all.) - Dan (talk) 03:44, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is true. Although Version 0.7 will be full articles, there has been discussion on doing this. In fact, just this week someone I know started to set up a chemistry mirror using data from chem articles together with the lead paragraph from each one - see this. We could very easily produce something that could be (for example) a "Dictionary of Military History" containing leads from the articles - there are almost 40,000 such articles of Start-Class and higher, 65,000 total - and that would make a very nice release (if the quality control were done carefully).
As I see it, once we have got a reliable system for producing offline releases quickly and easily, we can start to have WikiProjects designing custom releases, and we could either have a small encyclopedia release (e.g., 3000 organic chemical compounds) or a large dictionary-type release such as the one I mentioned. Both could fit on a CD and be easily downloaded. Walkerma (talk) 05:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, that was helpful. I'll pay more attention to leads when doing "well-written" checks! I will also, with your permission, copy your reply on the talk page of WP:LEAD. - Dan (talk) 12:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, by all means add it. It should be clear that we don't have any firm proposal at this point, only an intention. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 13:11, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia 1.0

I am not sure if an automated check will ever be good enough. Look at what our checker has been turning up in the year pages (and I have corrected and deleted the first load of errors she found) [3] . Years are pretty key but full of long standing rubbish vandalism... --BozMo talk 11:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, a very important point. We may need to work with the vandalism patrol people, and set up a list of specific articles that will need us to scrutinise manually. I suspect that some of the less important lists are similar.
BTW, I think we have a solution to the issue of weighting when a project doesn't use importance criteria, as we discussed for articles like rabbit and camel. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 13:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Chemical compound etc

Hey, thanks for the information.

Althought I (in this very moment) can't briefly read all your answer and summarize it for future use... because I'm is very busy right now and up to several week ahead (next Tuesday, 22 until 24 I will have a test for my senior high school graduation; please pray so I can pass it well, would you?).

But at least I already read your explanation a bit and of course the links to the article that you suggest to read. Really, thank you!

And sorry, I don't know that you have studied Indonesian language about 20 years! Really I'm sorry, so I think you must be understand about my private article Perbedaan antara Senyawa dengan Molekul which in Indonesian language.

Oh yeah, you spell right in "Hi Ivan - Selamat bertemu!" which means "Hi Ivan - Nice to meet you!" in English (at least like that). But the Hi word should be replaced to Halo (in Indonesian), but it's okay.

Thanks again! Ivan Akira (talk) 12:41, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Boat is now the Core Topics Collaboration

 You showed support for Boat at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Core topics/Core topics COTF. This article was selected as our collaboration. Hope you can help.

OK, get to work you lazy ... Walkerma (talk) 02:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What's this?

Hi, saw your comment on Talk:Space and noticed the link to this tool. I'd never seen this tool before, and as a participant at WP:COMICS, I'm interested in how I can use it. Thanks for any help you can offer. Hiding T 09:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hi! - Zotero and metadata idea

Hey Martin

Haven't spoken in a while; I'm finally home!

I believe you have some experience with Zotero in formatting refs? Perhaps you can assist User:Freestyle-69? See [4].

Secondly, I've been checking out Wikitravel, and they have this popup window for entering what they call "listings". Perhaps this will be useful for reaction information, for example? See [5].

Cheers! --Rifleman 82 (talk) 04:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Glad you got back safely, and it was nice to chat with you on IRC recently. I've lapsed into my "bad old practices" (copying refs into Word documents), I'm afraid, instead of using Zotero as I should! That means I don't think I can really advise.
That Wikitravel thing does definitely look interesting! We'll have to consider if that can be useful to us. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 04:56, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:SUP

Hey Martin

I'm not sure if you're aware of this page, but this might be of interest to you. Cheers! --Rifleman 82 (talk) 06:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Need help with edit conflict with User:wikidas

Dear Walkerma, can you please help on the Svayam bhagavan page. I am having a edit conflict with another editor name wikidas. Can you please mediate or help in some way. It is getting very heated between us ....Please, please help.Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 08:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I've taken a look at this, but unfortunately I can't really judge the edits being made here as I'm totally unfamiliar with the material. Sorry about that! All I can suggest is to keep a cool head, WP:AGF, and come to a consensus that all can accept. Some of the best Wikipedia articles on controversial topics have come about after very heated arguments, as long as all concerned respect one another and work towards a NPOV consensus. Good luck! Walkerma (talk) 04:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] HF

Bit surprised this stuff [6] isn't in the Wikipedia article on HF. Not even the extreme toxicity. I used to do that hazard assessments on the 50 tonne tank on HF at a NW UK refinery but I am sure it must all be public domain info since we discussed it with UK HSE a few times. The conditions give an LC50 of 100km from 50 tonnes of HF. But you know about these things better than I presumably? --BozMo talk 13:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I doubt that I do know more, but I do have some HF suppliers safety info at work I'll try to look at next week. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 04:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles May Newsletter

The May Newsletter for WikiProject Good Articles has now been published. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help! Boat parts

Hey Martin, I want to ask your help. In the section of Parts in the Boat article. You say that you had borrowed a book about boat from the library, right? Can you improve that section from your book? Help to add some pictures about boat parts and also the definition about it. Please (if you have time)... Ivan Akira (talk) 04:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

The books I have focus more on the history, which is what I decided to work on (I'm more at home with history than engineering, I think!). But if I come across anything suitable, I'll try and add it in. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 04:05, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey I'm sorry, my computer is so slow (I'm using my School computer). So I re-send my message to your talk page again, but now I delete it now. Ivan Akira (talk) 04:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Alrighty! I hope you can. Ivan Akira (talk) 13:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help! Phosphate and Protein

Martin, I need another help to expand the Cellular functions sub in Protein and clarify the Further reading sub in Phosphate. Thanks, sorry for this. Ivan Akira (talk) 06:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I've been very busy this week. The protein one is outside my area of expertise, but I can help with phosphate, maybe at the weekend. Walkerma (talk) 03:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

It's okay, I looking forward to your help. Thank you very much. Ivan Akira (talk) 13:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I'm available

What would you like to see happen before the 22nd (when you're going to be traveling?) - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 03:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I think it should be possible to come up with some suitable exemplars, and plan the layout, all before I go. Writing, and indeed the "distillation/simplification" part, may well be going on while I'm away, but I suspect that could go on just fine without me! We should have a sandbox version we all like, though, before we "go live" across 1000+ WikiProjects. If we do the "refining" part first, as I propose, a lot will depend on Holon's timetable. He is very knowledgeable in this area through his profession, and I had a great 90 minute phone conversation with him about his thoughts and ideas. But we will probably be the ones making suggestions on which exemplars may be useful, and what subject areas to use in order to get a good cross section of article types (your GA experience may help with that). Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 03:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Some Wikiprojects, such as MILHIST, are a shining example of collaborative ratings. Perhaps we should use this opportunity to highlight examples from some of the more active wikiprojects. If so, then members of those wikiprojects might be able to best suggest representative samples, which might vary a bit from project to project. If someone from a wikiproject selects a couple of representatives from each class for us to look at, I will be happy to join a conversation comparing and contrasting the articles. Feel free to assign me any work you like. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 03:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
That's great, thanks! I'll be in touch in a day or two on this. In the meantime, by all means browse around for some really good examples if you get the chance, or even solicit some suggestions from WikiProjects. Be warned, though, MILHIST has non-standard criteria for B-Class. Walkerma (talk) 03:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I'd like to help

I'd like to help rewrite the rating scheme, but not sure exactly where I should sign. Please count me in. Arman (Talk) 03:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] History of article assessments on en -Wikipedia

Someone asked about the history of article assessments on en-Wikipedia. They are also after practical advice on setting up a system on another language Wikipedia. See my reply here. I pointed them towards you and said I'd leave you a note, so here I am. Isn't it lucky Wikipedia keeps all its old disucssions! :-) Carcharoth (talk) 10:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Keeping it together

This discussion is effectively closed, but this and this discussions at the Pump and this discussion at the Assessment talk needs to happen at the same place. I completely agree to you on that. Is it just possible to close the proposal page discussion and put the arguments (there are a few) on the other discussion, possibly in a collapsible format? Will it be disruptive or something? I hope not, as it will put all the eggs in the same basket ready to be sorted. No? Aditya(talk • contribs) 14:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that is very sensible - in fact, that's why I tried to send people over to the WP:1.0 page, though it may have been lost in all the discussion. I've been busy of late (I just gave a two hour exam which ended 15 minutes ago), so my focus has been on my teaching, but as of 15 minutes ago I have a little more time to coordinate the work here. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 16:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] By the way

You may want to avoid using "votes", as some people will freak out... Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 06:21, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm aware that some people may complain, but (a) I think it will work well in this particular instance (b) it's not the only thing being used to assess consensus, (c) we've successfully used votes in the past and (d) I can't see a better way at this stage. The only reason I'm asking for a vote is that I believe there is already a consensus for making at least one change - the vote is mainly to confirm that fact. Let's see how it goes. Thanks for the comment, though! Walkerma (talk) 06:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
BTW, I'm not afraid to take a minority of votes as a consensus view, if those make a stronger case. Walkerma (talk) 06:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Walkerma, regarding this and this, I haven't heard back from Titoxd, and I'm going to be traveling soon, need to get resolution. If the two of you are interested, can you please close the loop with Jbmurray (talk · contribs)? Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I've replied here; if I can help further, please let me know. Thanks for the info. Walkerma (talk) 21:23, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
What we really needed was for someone to write the Dispatch (as I explained on Tito's page, but he seems to be away). If you could prop any old text in there, explaing the poll and the outcome, Jbmurray can probably finish it, but without that, this will be the first missed Dispatch on my watch. I left all the info on Tito's page about how and where to write it. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
I've replied on Jbmurray's page. I thought I'd given him enough info to write a piece, but the temp page appears to have an article on Featured Sounds, and it's quite long, so I'm assuming that it will be the only topic covered. If you still want to write a piece on this, it would probably be best to wait until the process is complete - I'm guessing June 15th or so, by which time I will be back online again. Please email me if you want my input on this, as I may not be able to read WP till then. Walkerma (talk) 22:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dispatch

Hi. Regarding this, it seems that there was some miscommunication. The idea was that you guys should draft the piece; I and others can then help copy-edit. Can you assure us that you can get something done by the 14th? If not, we will have to postpone this for another week, and look for someone else for that one. In the meantime, please watchlist WP:FCDW. Thanks. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 01:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure we can manage something by the 14th, if that is the best option. However, I want to check exactly what you want. The "second (final) round" poll is currently under way, and it will still be running on June 14th. Do you want to use the dispatch to drum up interest in the poll (so more people participate), or do you want to talk about the result of the poll? If it is the latter, then obviously the following week would be better. Please let me know here - I'm still on vacation, but I'm trying to check in here every 2-3 days. Thanks for the FCDW link, that should be helpful. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 18:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
That's in your hands. (I'm not following the poll itself.) If you do not think that June 14 is a good date, we can switch, but would have to know asap. It's also best to reply to WP:FCDW, so we can have a centralized discussion, and to which I will copy this correspondence. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hello!

Hello! Are you interested in a serious Wikimeetup? --Creamy!Talk 01:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good articles newsletter

Delivered manually due to long talk page. giggy (:O) 02:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dispatch

Hi there: how's it going for 16 June? Wikipedia_talk:Featured_content_dispatch_workshop#June_16 TONY (talk) 15:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Walkerma, if you can begin to rough something out at WP:FCDW/June 16, 2008, with the idea of having a draft by the 13th, others will help ce and round it out. You can see other sample Dispatches at {{FCDW}}. You could begin roughing in basic definitions, the history of the Assessment scheme, some data/stats on article assessments Projectwide, things like that, so that everything else will be in place to add the poll results once they're in. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:12, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I'll work on this a bit tonight. Walkerma (talk) 08:54, 11 June 2008 (UTC)