Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:03, 2 February 2008

This user advocates unified discussion, if you comment here, I will reply on your talk page and move the entire discussion to your talk page in the process; I would prefer it if you did the same, moving the thread back here for your reply. That way the discussions will always stay together and the intended recipient will see the message alert when he or she logs on. If you create a broken discussion by replying here while leaving my comments on your talk page, I may leave the discussion as is and continue the broken discussion, or I may reunite the discussion in my reply, depending on what I think makes more sense. Thanks.

Village pumps

policy

tech

proposals

idea lab

WMF

misc

• A request for adminship is open for discussion.
• Voluntary RfAs after resignation
• Allowing page movers to enable two-factor authentication
• Rewriting the guideline Misplaced Pages:Please do not bite the newcomers
• Should comments made using LLMs or chatbots be discounted or even removed?

• view
• edit
• history
• watch
• archive
• talk
• purge

Welcome!

Hello, Doug, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ~~~~; this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

I saw you had signed up for the Law WikiProject but that no-one had said "hello" yet. Hope you enjoy your time on Misplaced Pages. Regards, Bencherlite 10:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Tagging and assessing

To answer your questions as best I can:

1. yes, you can (even should) tag the article with {{law-stub}} and also tag the talk page with the law project template, assessing it as a stub. The two tags put the articles into two separate categories, rather than the same category twice (one for the project, one for the stub) so that's not a problem.
2. I don't think there's any rule that you can't assess an article you have created or helped with as stub/start/B-class. In fact, I've been merrily assessing biography articles I've written as stub or start. The article grades beyond that (GA/A/FA) are only handed out after more careful consideration, and can't be self-awarded. But no-one's going to mind if you write a stub and call it a stub: what else would it be? If anyone is really bothered that you've assessed an article as a start instead of a stub, or vice versa, they can change it!
3. I've not seen tags being signed anywhere. I suspect it's best not to, as it will look slightly odd. If someone really wants to know who tagged and assessed an article, it'll be in the talk page history. If you think that someone might contest the inclusion of the tag or the rating, you could leave a quick note of explanation on the talk-page, but most of the time it will be obvious. If it's not, other editors can either reassess the article or discuss with you / the project whether the tag is required.

Hope all this helps. I've haven't been involved with tagging / assessing of law-related articles, but I can't see why they'd have different standards. Regards, Bencherlite 21:11, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

WPBiography

Hi, and welcome to the Biography WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of biographies.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Starting some new articles? Our article structure tips outlines some things to include.
• Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every biography article in Misplaced Pages.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! -Duribald 06:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
• Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, offline publication, article improvement contests, and other tasks.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill 08:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Fora/Forums

I saw your amendment. In Latin, fora would be correct, but forum, I would think, is now part of the English language to the extent that forums is an acceptable plural. "Quorum" is close to this status, but not quite there because it doesn't have the widespread currency of forum. Regards --Rodhullandemu 21:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem there but I know how pernickerty lawyers can get (I once acted in a case which revolved round the placing of a comma). I doubt if anyone will pull you up over it. WP:Law seems a little out of date and loosely worded in some areas so there's plenty of scope for improvement. Welcome on board!--Rodhullandemu 22:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:Reform

Hi, Doug! Thanks for the message!

I'm not sure how the historical tag got onto WP:Reform. I didn't put it there, and I didn't notice it happen. However, as I recall, the discussion did sorta die. As I recall, User:TimNelson and I were discussing things, and we sorta hit a break-through at about the same time we both seem to have taken breaks.

What I meant by "take a swipe at" is to look over the reform proposal there and see if/how it needs to be cleaned up - and what it would take to make it work. My guess (and I'm no expert at guidelines, process, etc) is that once it looks good, a notice should be placed at WP:VPR and/or WP:RFC. And maybe two weeks later, another set of comments should be placed at those places.

My sense is that it looks good, but needs some cleanup and/or clarification. Honestly, though, I haven't read it in three months. Maybe your comments/questions will kick me into helping out with it some more and getting it running :) I firmly believe there are many dead WikiProjects that need to be merged into active ones or removed.

A thought that just occurred to me is that admins are part of the AfD process, and may or may not need to be part of the WPfD process. Is there a place for asking admins what they think and/or how they might be needed? Just a thought.

Anyway, thanks again for the comment. And let me know what you think and how I can help. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 00:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Hm. You've just made me rethink this issue.

I was about to write to you that there isn't a mixed message, mostly because it isn't spelled out anywhere how to remove WikiProjects. And (I believed) there really hadn't been any WikiProjects removed. But I just did a quick search in the logs of MfD and found out that I was wrong.

About 280 WikiProjects have been brought up for deletion. I haven't gone through all of them, so I don't know how many have actually been deleted or merged into others, but that's a much larger number than I thought.

So I was questioning whether Misplaced Pages:WikiProject reform was even necessary, but I think I've decided that it is. MfD just isn't suited for the kind of discussion that's been suggested at Reform - it isn't specific to WikiProjects, after all.

I guess I agree that there are mixed messages, but I disagree that WPfD should be done within WP:Council. My main reason is that WP:Council is a tiny place - there are very few people involved, and (as you can see from the discussion page) not many of them are very active in it. By following up on WPfD and making it an active and useful process, we'll be opening up WP discussions to a much wider audience and getting true consensus. It may not result in as many projects being deleted as we would like, but it may get people involved from related projects and make more wikiprojects active again.

So what's next? Centralize discussion? That seems appropriate. My suggestion is we do that at the Reform page - or perhaps start a discussion at WP:CENT and see if we can get input from others that aren't involved in (or may not know about) WP:Council. Thoughts? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 20:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Doug! Please take a look at User:SatyrTN/mfd when you get a chance. There are a couple things that need to be addressed before releasing that to a wider audience (like the centralized discussion). First among those is there needs to be a guideline page (or just a section of that page) that outlines the options Keep, Merge, Userfy, and Delete. The templates also need to be created, but I suspect that should wait until there's been wider discussion. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 15:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Deprecation

As I envisioned Misplaced Pages practice at the time of that content, a deprecated policy or project is one that is no longer active, in use, or in force. Such content has historically been maintained (and marked "historical"). Especially as regards policy, deprecation further indicates the policy that supersedes the historical content, when such a target is available.

Of course, not everything winds up working that way, and I'm neutral as to whether or not this is a good system ... only that it is my observations on how things have been done. Serpent's Choice 19:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Deletion review

This is the process that is generally followed whenever anyone wants to recover an article or WikiProject which has previously been deleted, and at least one Project, Misplaced Pages:WikiProject University of Virginia was returned after having been deleted. Just thought you might like to know. John Carter 01:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletions

I think to some extent that's a "cover all bases" approach - occasionally some disaster happens (one big one happened some years ago) and they lose all deleted contributions. However, with the number of people and institutions who have downloaded database dumps this is far less of a problem than it once was. I don't believe in deletion as archiving, though - however I do use some deleted pages as a guide to following chains of events which would otherwise be rendered incomprehensible. Orderinchaos 01:02, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh and re the LM MfD - essentially WP Australia is reorganising some of its own subprojects over the next 12 months, there used to be less controls on creating them than there is today. Some have inadequate scope to survive meaningfully and the articles in their scopes suffer as a result as others incorrectly assume the project is looking after them - I recently upgraded all the LM articles and was stunned how many were missing or unmaintained. Any maintenance going on had little or nothing to do with the project. Integrating it into WP:NSW meant we could approach it as a broader challenge. Orderinchaos 01:06, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

WP Australia allows considerable autonomy for each project. Currently none of the projects have task forces, mainly due to size issues - i.e. the same 5 editors working on Hunter region articles may well be also working on the rest of NSW as well, so it doesn't make sense to split purposes - but when/if the projects grow then that is the preferred way for them to grow. Orderinchaos 01:24, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

LOL! Sounds like a plan. As for me, I've got to head off to university now and give a presentation on gender issues in education. Fun stuff. (Out of raw curiosity, this is about gender disadvantage in education, being given by me, a male, to a class of whom 85% are female!) Orderinchaos 01:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

re. I believe that deletion means deletion

Sorry, I wasn't aware of the current discussion going on in that regard. I simply made that comment with the belief that you weren't aware of undeletion facilities (which must have been a bit undermining, so I apologise). Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 06:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

WPfD

Have you noticed in the discussion at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council/Inactive projects the discussion of User:SatyrTN's proposal for a new WPfD? I know you are interested in the subject and wanted to make sure you saw what we're talking about. I'm also glad to see that I'm not the only one who supports userfication over deletion of one person projects.--Doug. 23:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite/head's up : )

Responded there. - jc37 04:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject recruitment for WikiProjects

Doug,

Would you be interested in trying to make your (proposed) WikiProject becoming a succes by actively involving yourself in a recruitment agency aimed at establishing an active base of participants for a WikiProject?--Daanschr 10:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

BTW

BTW, I really like the way you do User talk posts, this works great. Also, I left a comment at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council/Inactive projects for you.--Doug. 02:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm a fan of unified discussion : ) - Though I moved the discussion to the MfD talk page for transparency.

And as for WPC/IP, thanks for the note, I'll comment there. - jc37 02:22, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Merge

I've completed the merge and left a note at Misplaced Pages talk:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Thanks you for participating and helping with the process. If you need anything else on this, please talk page me. — xaosflux 03:11, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

The history merge feature maintains attribution of prior edits in the final document. Depending on the type of content being merged, it is favorable for maintaining attribution, without it anyone researching for attribution of items would need to read through edit histories, then find other pages, and go through their edit histories. On more then one occasion the R from Merge copy/paste method has ended up with other editors editing the redirect on the old page, creating forks that have to be merged again. History merge is admin-only as reversing it is very time consuming. We don't widely advertise it for beansy reasons. — xaosflux 12:19, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography Newsletter 5

The Biography WikiProject Newsletter Volume IV, no. 4 - September 2007
Project News The three-month long Summer Assessment Drive, organized by Psychless, was a huge success! It ran from June 1 – September 1, and reduced the backlog of unassessed articles from 113,385 to 56,237. In all, over 100,000 articles were assessed. Over 60 people contributed in some way. A barnstar has been created for exceptional work on Misplaced Pages biographies and for assisting the project. The Biography Barnstar is listed with the other WikiProject awards and can be awarded easily with a template. See the template page for more details. Member News Congratulations to the editors who worked on the newest featured biographies: Augustus; William Shakespeare; Adriaen van der Donck; Alfred Russel Wallace; Alison Krauss; Anne Frank; Anne of Denmark; Asser; Bart King; Bill O'Reilly; Bobby Robson; Bradley Joseph; CM Punk; Ceawlin of Wessex; Colley Cibber; Cædwalla of Wessex; Dominik Hašek; Elizabeth Needham; Frank Macfarlane Burnet; Georg Cantor; Gregory of Nazianzus; Gunnhild Mother of Kings; Gwen Stefani; Hannah Primrose, Countess of Rosebery; Harriet Arbuthnot; Harry S. Truman; Henry, Bishop of Uppsala; Héctor Lavoe; Ine of Wessex; Ion Heliade Rădulescu; Jack Sheppard; Jackie Chan; Jay Chou; John Martin Scripps; John Mayer; Joseph Francis Shea; Joshua A. Norton; Kate Bush; Kazi Nazrul Islam; Kevin Pietersen; Martin Brodeur; Mary Martha Sherwood; Mary of Teck; Maximus the Confessor; Miranda Otto; Muhammad Ali Jinnah; P. K. van der Byl; Penda of Mercia; Pham Ngoc Thao; Rabindranath Tagore; Ramón Emeterio Betances; Red Barn Murder; Richard Hakluyt; Richard Hawes; Robert Garran; Roman Vishniac; Ronald Niel Stuart; Ronald Reagan; Roy Welensky; Rudolph Cartier; Samuel Adams; Samuel Beckett; Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough; Sarah Trimmer; Sargon of Akkad; Shen Kuo; Sophie Blanchard; Stereolab; Sydney Newman; Sylvanus Morley; Tim Duncan; Timeline of Mary Wollstonecraft; Uncle Tupelo; Waisale Serevi; Wallis, Duchess of Windsor; Walter Model; William Bruce; William Goebel; Yagan; Zhou Tong; Æthelbald of Mercia; Æthelbald of Mercia New Members Congratulations to our 225 new members	From the Editors The newsletter is back! Many things have gone on during the past few months, but many things have not. While the assessment drive helped revitalize the assessment department of the project, many other departments have received no attention. Most notably: peer review and our "workgroups". A day long IRC meeting has been planned for October 13th, with the major focus being which areas of the project are "dead", what should our goals be as a project, and how to "revive" the dead areas of our project. Contribute to the discussion on the the new channel (see below) We decided to deliver this newsletter to all project members this month but only those with their names down here will get it delivered in the future. This is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue. Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned or post news on the next issue's talk page New irc channel Lastly, a new WikiProject Biography channel has been set up on the freenode network: #wikipedia-en-bio Our thanks to Phoenix 15 for setting it up. Contributors to this Issue Psychless (talk · contribs) Phoenix 15 (talk · contribs)
Complete To Do List Write an article Expand an article about: a person an actor an animator an artist a bishop a businessperson a diplomat an educator an engineer a lawyer a military person a musician a photographer a saint a politician a scientist a sportsperson a writer Improve an article by: adding references adding categories Review an article Romano Volta • Suzanne Carrell • Mullá Husayn • John Gilchrist (linguist) • Thomas Brattle • Answer requests for comments Work on the Portal Portal:Biography Assess an article Assessment requests Unassessed articles Assessment Progress Biography articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Core Other ??? Total FA 35 1,634 1,669 FL 205 205 FM 616 616 A 1 131 132 GA 41 8,388 8,429 B 98 40,602 40,700 C 33 172,778 172,811 Start 1 765,483 765,484 Stub 1 1,030,128 1 1,030,130 List 8,202 8,202 Category 12,409 12,409 Disambig 3,908 3,908 File 31,292 31,292 Project 214 214 Redirect 3 44,874 44,877 Template 3,924 3,924 NA 15 15 Assessed 213 2,124,803 1 2,125,017 Unassessed 23,995 23,995 Total 213 2,148,798 1 2,149,012 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 10,839,863 Ω = 5.37
We couldn't do it without you!

To receive this newsletter in the future, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter was delivered by the automated R Delivery Bot 15:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC) .

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)

The September 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 09:21, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Attention Tag, WP:MIL

I had a discussion with Kirill on this some time ago, and the consensus as I understood it was that if there weren't MAJOR URGENT issues with an article, it shouldn't have the tag. There are tens of thousands of un-ref'd, or badly underref'd articles within the project right now, so with a total of around 120 attention tags, there should be greater issues with an article than that if the tag is applied. Regards Buckshot06 06:36, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

re: WikiProject Aramaic

So, this was saved but barely, and userfied to your user space. Mind if I do some editing there? Will you be around at all? Will you "watch" the page? You're clearly the subject matter expert and I'm just an interested editor (spent some time in Ninewah Province, Iraq), so I really wouldn't want to be alone on this. If I don't hear otherwise, I'll just start editing when I get the time. Please respond on my talk page (preferably by moving the discussion so it stays together)--Doug. 22:25, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Certainly, please feel free to edit at your leisure. My schedule has suddenly become much busier than I intended, as I had hoped to drum up some interest in the group before it was userified. אמר Steve Caruso 19:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Maine Meetup?

Greetings! My name is Garrett Fitzgerald, and I've lived in Brewer for the past year. I just thought I'd check in with the rest of the Maine Wikipedians to see if there was enough interest to start organizing a Misplaced Pages:Meetup somewhere in the state. If you're interested, drop me a note by email or userpage: if there's enough interest, I'll see about organizing a bit more formally. See you around!--SarekOfVulcan 07:05, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography newsletter

A new newsletter has been released; Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Biography/Outreach/Newsletter/Issue 006
Note: You have been delivered this notice because you are listed on the WikiProject Biography Spamlist. If you do not wish to receive this notice, remove your name. From the automated, Anibot 16:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Agriculture

Thanks for the warm welcome, I wholly agree that this project has long been needed. When I created Christmas tree cultivation I couldn't believe there wasn't an Agriculture project. I will be pouring over what work needs to be done, and helping out where I can, certainly. You may want to extend an invitation to join to User:Wassupwestcoast, he has a degree in some kind of agricultural field, and helped immensely with the Christmas tree article above. IvoShandor 22:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for inviting me. I see that you've discovered Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening. That project is pretty well moribund. I suggest merging everything into Agriculture and inviting the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening#Participants over. I think only one or two are active editors. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast 23:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Agriculture banner

I think the categories are all set up correctly. Can you show me an example of where the NA class article category is shown? Remember to look at the categories on the bottom rather than in the template itself too. The templates were standardized I don't know how long ago for color and whatnot, but I just assessed Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Agriculture/Assessment and the categorization looks right. John Carter 23:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

All banners are supposed to link to Category:(X)-Class (topic) articles. The Category:B-Class articles, for instance, is the category for all the articles of all projects assessed at that level. None of the banners should be linking directly to that category. If you know of one, let me know so that it can be corrected, because it probably should be. Remember, look at the categories at the bottom of the page, not the banner' statement itself. John Carter 01:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

basic lists topic coverage banner

I don't know how to nest templates. It looks like pretty complex code. The Transhumanist 01:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Long comment

Many people patrol the short pages (you can find it through the special pages link on the side), when one does so and finds that there is no obvious problem, you add a long comment to avoid everyone checking the same OK things over and over again. Carlossuarez46 16:57, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Dragonfly

Hi, Doug, I've removed the WP:farm tag from dragonfly. I can't imagine why any dragonflies are part of that project, but I assume you know what you are doing. The reason I've removed the tag from this page is that I don't believe that all dragonflies have agricultural importance, and you should just tag the ones that do. To tag the whole order is like tagging insect because silkworms are farmed. Jimfbleak 05:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Agriculture

The agriculture list page and the portal and the template need to be fixed. The template should be shorten down. The list should be expanded. The portal should be updated. Please stop removing the navigation template from article pages. The portal link is already on it and using nav boxes is standared practice. Portal links in place of nav boxes is a bad idea. WAS 4.250 19:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your warm welcome. I'm sure we can all work together successfully to make Misplaced Pages better. Your leadership is essential for the agriculture project to be all it can be. I could add more cliches here, but you get the idea. I mean everything I've said, I'm not playing games here. You hold the confidence of the troops. Go for it. (Whoops, more cliches. Oh well.) WAS 4.250 05:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

I've neever seen any other projects who welcome newbies personally. I look forward to editing along side you--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 10:45, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter November 2007

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter November 2007
--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 04:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Things equine

Hi Doug,

Feel free to drop me a line any time you want input on a horse issue. I am not watchlisting project ag, but if there is a specific discussion there or elsewhere that involves either horses (in any way) or the America west (where I live, and have a grasp on regional Ag stuff generally), give me a shout and I will pop over and weigh in. But beyond that, I am pretty much confining myself to editing and monitoring the various articles I have watchlisted, which right now is aroung 500. No, I only wish this was WP:OWN, it really is quality control and I leave good edits alone, or only wordsmith style, not content. (note how many bot reverts say "reverted to last version by Montanabw? I rest my case) It isn't the kids who feel they must comment on equine genitalia or cowboy sexual orientation that annoy me as much as the really creative little trolls who sneak in things like "horses are PURPLE with PINK eyes" into 16 different articles! That and commercial linkspam (www dot myranchrules dot com) ARRGH!! Montanabw 20:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:FARM

I noticed you placed a note on WP:ANIMALS that WP:HORSE shares its parentage with WP:FARM. I removed it, primarily because the project scope on WP:ANIMALS is designed to show relevant subprojects. I understand listing the shared parentage on the project itself, but if we start listing all the various "shared parentage" projects on WP:ANIMALS the project tree, it'll be a mess. Justin 02:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)

The October 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 13:50, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Firearms

Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.--LWF 03:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Infobox?

I left you message on my talk page. --BlindEagle 15:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Plantscience

I think this is a good example of when to use WP:IAR, especially given the small amount of user links. The user probably meant to use his/her userspace but didn't know how to us it. Either that, or wanted to promote the article Plantscience. But if he/she wants to sign on talk pages, we should reasonably assume most users will want to visit their userpage, and not an article. Go ahead and change it. I'll back you up. - Mtmelendez 16:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

re: WP:DELPRO

Unified discussions have always struck me as a waste of time but I'll try to keep the thread together for you. I've crafted a reply on my Talk page for you. Rossami (talk) 23:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)

The November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 01:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter December 2007

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter Decemberr 2007
--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 22:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Invite to WikiProject Equine

This is the official word: WikiProject Equine was quietly created by someone while the rest of us were endlessly discussing a WikiProject Horse. We have an official project! So let's go with it, and I am officially inviting you to formally join! Go to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Equine, add your name to the list and see what you can contribute. If you haven't already joined Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Horse breeds or one of the other "child" or "affiliated" wikiprojects at WikiProject Equine, please feel free to do so. Just trying to tag articles with the new templates has awakened me to the fact that there are over 1000 equine articles in Misplaced Pages! (My watchlist alone is now at something like 700+) There's much to do and plenty for everyone! Thanks! Montanabw 09:18, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Romania Help

Hi - I'm working on a split of Category:Communes and villages in Romania because someone made a lot of stubs. I based some edits on previously created categories for communes, but I am not so sure that make sense now that I've looked at it more deeply. Do you think it would be better to make categories for communes, for localities, or for communes and villages? There are all three types in the category. Whatever is best, it should be done in a uniform way. I know I made a lot of edits already, but if you (and Romania wikiproject) think something else is best, don't worry -- I'm willing to change it all back. Looking forward to your opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aelfthrytha (talk • contribs) 01:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter January 2008

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter January 2008
--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 05:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

RE: Welcome to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject European history

Welcome, sorry for the delay in getting a message out. The project is slowly reorganizing. The Project page is a bit out of date and needs updating badly. Please check the talk page for more current information and please Tag, Tag, Tag, the talk pages of any article in this topic so we can start trying to coordinate work on articles and give us some suggestions on the talk page for how we can get this Project moving again. Currently there are hundreds of related articles that are not tagged yet. Thanks and again, welcome!--Doug. 03:27, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome. I will tag any untagged articles I come across. --Merovingian (T, C) 13:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

M-1 Carbine Revert War

The M1 carbine article is currently on lock down. An administrator has requested some discussion from memeber of the Firearms Wikiproject. Can you take a look? Sf46 (talk) 19:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter — Issue XXII (December 2007)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXII (December 2007)
Project news The Intelligence task force has been created. The contest department has completed its ninth month of competition. The top scorer this month is Blnguyen, with 22 points, followed by Dreamafter, with 8 points, and Redmarkviolinist, with 6 points. Blnguyen also remains the overall leader, with 162 points in total. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries. Help with converting deprecated infoboxes is needed; any assistance is welcome! {{WPMILHIST}} now supports an explicit tag (class=DAB) for marking disambiguation pages.	Articles of note New featured articles: Battle of Albuera Battle of Dyrrhachium (1081) Battle of the Gebora Constantine II of Scotland Francis Harvey Vasa (ship) Wulfhere of Mercia New A-Class articles: 1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing Evacuation of East Prussia
Current proposals and discussions A discussion about minimizing terminological ambiguity has begun.
Awards and honors Blnguyen has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his efforts in improving the quality of articles related to Vietnamese military history, including the creation of numerous A-Class articles. Woodym555 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding work on topics related to the Victoria Cross, notably including the creation of featured articles, featured lists, and a featured topic. For their outstanding efforts as part of Tag & Assess 2007, Bedford, TomStar81, and Parsival74 have been awarded the gold, silver, and bronze Wikis, respectively.
Tag & Assess 2007 Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows: 1. Bedford — 7,600 2. TomStar81 — 5,500 3. Parsival74 — 5,200 4. FayssalF — 3,500 5. Roger Davies — 3,000 6. Ouro — 2600 7. Kateshortforbob — 2250 8. Cromdog — 2,200 9. BrokenSphere — 2000 9. Jacksinterweb — 2,000 9. Maralia — 2,000 12. MBK004 — 1,340 13. JKBrooks85 — 1,250 14. Sniperz11 — 1100 15. Burzmali — 1000 15. Cplakidas — 1000 15. Gimme danger — 1000 15. Raoulduke471000 15. TicketMan — 1000 15. Welsh — 1000 15. Blnguyen — 1000 Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-participants alike are very welcome and appreciated.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

Note: This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated, Anibot (talk) 23:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:EH

While I was on an informal wikibreak several new members joined European History, but no changes really since we last talked so things are still badly in need of work. I've added some things to our strategy discussion, changed the "collaboration of the month" unilaterally, and generally tried to clean up a bit, but I could really use some thoughts.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 20:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely. I'm on vacation right now so I will be a little slow for the next couple of days, but I will check it out.

Cheers - Revolving Bugbear 21:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I've left an advertising proposal on the project talk page. linkage. - Revolving Bugbear 22:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey what was this about?

I wasn't logged in, and I made this edit which you reverted before I could even fix a redlink in it. What was that for? I don't really care as I was still there and I wanted to sign anyway but it seemed like an odd reversion without any edit comment. Please respond on my talk page (unified discussion if you don't mind to much, i.e. cut and paste this there). Thanks.--Doug. 15:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

sorry, thought you were a vandal--Heliac (talk) 15:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello. You may have seen that some Misplaced Pages articles lack sources to given dates, timelines and chronologies.
If you feel that you could like to help in making all articles more reliable and well sourced in this regard, we would like to encourage you to use, as part of your daily editing and when {{fact}} is not enough for requesting clearly and specifically a citation or source for dates, timeline or chronology, the following inline tag:

{{Timefact}} displays for requesting timelines, dates and chronology sources. Click here for more information

At WP Timeline Tracer, we thank you for using these tools and for helping to make Misplaced Pages articles more accurate and reliable.

Daoken 11:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Some-bot-y loves you

User:SineBot must think you're hot . You might want to add Category:Wikipedians who have opted out of automatic signing to your userpage to prevent this in the future. Good luck! --12 Noon  22:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Transylvania Portal

I added one current event, from where more can be found at a Romanian newspaper called Romania Libera. This is the link: . The story is not the one I added on the portal. I left a similar message on the Portal's talk page. Basketballoneten 15:48, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

LeeRamsey (talk) 04:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:MEDCAB case

Are you working Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-01-18 Political positions of John Edwards? I notice you marked up the case page but the case still shows as "needing a mediator" rather than "open". If you are working this case, would you mind if I joined along with you, I've participated in several WP:DR matters before but never a WP:MEDCAB matter and I'm trying to do more work to help people resolve their differences and focus on building the encyclopedia. (If you respond on my talk page, I'd greatly appreciate it if you'd move the whole discussion as I prefer unified discussions). TIA. --Doug. 04:38, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

No, I am not handling it. Didn't seem like the parties got the idea of mediation (I interpreted that they wanted to change policy on how 'pedia handles political candidates). Also, I'm a huge Hillary Clinton fan and a life-long Conservative (go figure) so that has COI written all over it. I'll help out (fact checking, sourcing, etc) if you want to co-mediate it, but I'd rather not take the lead. MBisanz 04:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, let's do it. I can't stand Hillary, BTW, but I'm a New England "Liberal Republican" so I've got no horse in this race. You'll have to give me some idea though how this all works. I know the suggestions say to just start talking on the talk page for the article. Additionally, I'd appreciate it if you'd keep an eye on me and don't be afraid to whack me, if I do anything silly.--Doug. 05:02, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I've opened the case, listed us both as mediators and posted a comment on the article talk page. Based on the discussion on the case page it doesn't look like there is much likelihood of them coming together to work on what we're all here for, but we'll give it a try.--Doug. 06:02, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Well a user declined and its a voluntary process, so I closed the case. Downt he road, once the issue gets more defined they may be back. Good job commenting in the case though. MBisanz 07:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank You

I'd just like to express my gratitude for your sending me the Misplaced Pages:Law template, and for not only telling me how to use italics on Misplaced Pages, but actually editing my user page and placing the italics where needed. Stuff like that means a lot to a user who hasn't even been on a full two days yet. Consider this your 'barnstar substitute'. :-}LeeRamsey (talk) 05:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiAdoption

I'd be thrilled if you adopted me (in the Wikiverse, that is). If all else fails, as a member of Wikiprojects Law, Mammals, and Firearms, you'd probably know whether or not it's legal to shoot animals tresspassing onto private property...which is debated more often than I'd care to admit at family gatherings. (In my defense, I return them to their owner when feasible.)LeeRamsey (talk) 04:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

All right, cool. I'm now adopted.LeeRamsey (talk) 05:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I now have the 'This is a user page, not an enclopedia page' warning at the top of the page, and have installed a sandbox. Now all I have to do is keep the neighborhood cats/WikiTrolls out of it.LeeRamsey (talk) 02:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Nancy Reagan MedCab request

Thanks for watching this. I do intend to complete this request but haven't the time. I will complete this request tomorrow evening. Thanks again and have a great day. 207.237.228.83 (talk) 05:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Have begun cabal request but got pulled into conference call that ran very late. Will complete in the next few days. Thanks again for your patience. 207.237.228.83 (talk) 07:28, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Doug, there seems to be a good volume of detail in my challenges to the NPOV of the Nancy Reagan article with many references, including detailed conversations found on all involved party's talk pages, other user's talk pages, the Nancy Reagan discussion page, the promotion process of the article to FA status, and on the discussion pages of related articles...exactly how much detail am I to use when filling out this form? Should I provide links to examples of the problems I have found, or do you want just a brief summary that will be questioned later? Please advise. Thanks so much. 207.237.228.83 (talk) 07:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

A Fundamentally Unfair Course of Action Regarding Talk: Phil Hall (US Writer)

I am sorry, but I strongly disagree with your course of action regarding the user DoubleCross and myself.

According to Misplaced Pages: "Assuming good faith is about intention, not action. Well-meaning persons make mistakes, and you should correct them when they do."

The user DoubleCross gets a "caution" note for posting a completely irrelevant link to a hostile flamer thread on the IMDB and then threatening to keep reposting it, but I am getting a "warning" for removing it -- and complaining about his perceived trolling behavior? That doesn't strike me as very fair. I believe the proper course of action is having both of us get "caution" notices.

As it stands, this is fundamentally unjust and condones improper behavior on the part of DoubleCross while penalizing me for trying to prevent what I saw as disruptive behavior. Ecoleetage (talk) 21:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• I have clarified that "caution note" is equivalent to a level one warning at the Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette_alerts#Talk:Phil_Hall_.28US_writer.29_and_user_DoubleCross and have noted that you dispute the warning on your talk page. Other users can read the discussion and of course you can elaborate (within the bounds of policy regarding userpages) as you feel necessary on your talk page.--Doug. 22:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Doug, I am politely requesting that the "warning" be removed and replaced with a "caution" note, which you applied to the individual who is the CAUSE of the complaint. Your judgment is harsh and blatantly unfair -- particularly your coddling of the individual whose disruptive behavior is the center of this complaint.

I have to ask if you know this individual and if you are applying a double standard, since your communications with the subject of the complaint is excessively soft and your language in communicating with me comes across as rude and condescending -- particularly in an editing fix of the Phil Hall (US writer) page that is clearly an act of juvenile stick-out-your-tongue sarcasm aimed directly at me (and you know what I am talking about!). Ecoleetage (talk) 01:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Doug, in regard to your comments: "I understand entirely, just let me know if you would like me to suggest some others to assist. You may also want to review the Guide to Requesting Adminship or seek assistance from Admin Coaching. --Doug.(talk • contribs) 14:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)"

If you wish to be of assistance, then please show genuine fairness in your actions by acknowledging "good faith" (which you are demanding of others but not showing yourself) and retracting your "Warning" that you improperly issued against me. Your decision was biased, unfair and unjust, and your refusal to acknowledge the obvious imbalance of your actions is, on its own terms, a smack against Misplaced Pages's good faith doctrines. Thank you. Ecoleetage (talk) 15:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• I would like to address your comments regarded your handling of my WQA case, which I just discovered on this page:

The exact quote:

“WP:WQA: Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette_alerts#Talk:Phil_Hall_.28US_writer.29_and_user_DoubleCross - only the initiator, who appeared to be a WP:SPA was active in the discussion while I was involved and when I suggested the initiator needed to review several policies and that comments on a talk page should be restored, at least in part, the initiator promptly declared the matter closed. I gave a level one warning to the initiator for several issues, primarily removing talk page material and placed a customized warning note on the other parties page for introducing irrelevant material to the talk page. I felt however, that the initiator had come asking for help but only if supported his or her position and needed to be told his or her conduct was inappropriate. Initiator complained both at the WQA and on my talk page that this was unfair treatment and that the other party was to blame, etc. In hind sight, I would not have done this but let sleeping dogs lie. I reminded the initiator that WQA is not arbitration, I'm just an independent editor and my "warnings" are not penalties and are certainly not "judgments". When I attempted to cool things down and offered to explain my reasoning in point-by-point detail, the initiator again declared the matter "closed".”

Clearly, you are not exercising good will, as per Misplaced Pages requirements. You are also bending the facts.

1. I requested assistance in a single paragraph, out of concern that someone who appeared to be a troll was vandalizing an article. This is not mentioned.

2. I disagreed with the restoration of the Talk Page contents because the point of contention raised by the other party, an error regarding the Pulitzer Prize, had already been corrected and I felt a restoration would be pointless since it would be calling attention to an extinct mistake. This is not mentioned.

3. You ridiculed a point I made suggesting that editors should have knowledge of the subject they are reviewing -- this came in a sarcastic comment accompanying your edit of a very minor typo in the Phil Hall (US writer) page. Your actions are not mentioned in your summary.

4. Your comment that I “had come asking for help but only if supported his or her position” flies in the face of the Misplaced Pages doctrine regarding good will. The reason for my request for help was clearly in regard to perceived trolling and not the need to be reminded I am correct. Again, that is not mentioned.

5. Regarding “Initiator complained both at the WQA and on my talk page that this was unfair treatment and that the other party was to blame, etc.” – my complaints clearly stated the other party was receiving excessively lenient treatment whereas I was being held to a very different standard.

6. Regarding: “In hind sight, I would not have done this but let sleeping dogs lie.” - On the WQA, you defended your actions – but here, you are stating this was incorrect. If this is an admission of error, then be professional and retract your warning and openly admit your decision was inappropriate.

I can say, with no degree of exaggeration, that this incident has thoroughly spoiled my enjoyment of Misplaced Pages. I sincerely wanted to stop someone I perceived to be a troll, and I received no help. Instead, I was treated rudely. This is very last time I am making a request for assistance. Ecoleetage (talk) 19:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• I think at this point it would be best if you were to ask another editor for assistance or take another dispute resolution course.

• As for the comments you reference above, these comments were intended as note to self, not as a legal brief in my defense nor as a summary of your case for others to reference when they want to see how the case turned out. Your item 6 is not an admission of error, the warnings were appropriate - they just didn't improve the situation, they escalated it. I would prefer not to escalate things in general. You can rest assured that I will soon add links out to all of the dispute discussions and that I will not add any links on any of the dispute discussions to that page - that is not the purpose of the page. If you would like, I will even remove the link above that you have added. Other links to those comments are intended for my convenience and the convenience of other WP:DR volunteers who may wish to see what cases I've been involved in; not for anyone who might be interested in researching your conduct or that of any of the other parties to any of those cases. I will eventually add disclaimers to that effect. If you feel that I treated you rudely, I am truly sorry that you feel that way; please feel free to list my conduct on WP:WQA and get other opinions, thanks. --Doug. 20:56, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Doug, at this point, any further examination of this case is pointless as the individual who was the source of the problem (DoubleCross) walked away from the dispute days ago.

• I was actually referring to your dispute with me over the warnings. You might try WP:3O as another option.--Doug. 21:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• I can understand your discomfort in having your comments publicized. To use the worst cliche imaginable, no further comment is necessary! Ecoleetage (talk) 21:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Not at all, feel free to put links to that page anywhere that it improves the project.--Doug. 21:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Doug, I just saw your edits on the User Doug/DR page , with this line added: "I also could have been clearer about the warning on the other user's talk page that it was intended as a warning against bringing in irrelevant and inflammatory material."

You "could have been clearer"? Then why not do something about it? Do you want a fair solution? Then why not issue the same Level 1 Warning to DoubleCross that you issued to me? This way, we both get the same smack in the face and we're even. As it stands, your resolution is unbalanced, biased and blatantly slanted in favor of someone who, by your admission, is not following Misplaced Pages policy. Ecoleetage (talk) 02:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• You misunderstand entirely the purpose of those comments. I have removed them and will try keep my thoughts on ongoing matters off project (yes, you can still get there from the diff). I guess the matter is not closed after all. I stand by my warnings as written.--Doug. 02:55, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Re Josepha Marschke's edits

Just to let you know that I have responded to your request, here. -- Roleplayer (talk) 01:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! TomStar81 (Talk) 02:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Nancy Reagan

The only connection I have to this article is that I participated in the FAC discussions as a previously uninvolved editor and did a small amount editing of it at that time - 16 edits - to try to help satisfy some problems that I and others observed. Happyme22 was cooperative, the FAC process went a few rounds, and most of my concerns were satisfied by the time it received FA status. Since then I kept it on my watchlist but made no edits on or about it until I noticed this personal attack on Happyme22 and then, looking further, noticed this much more egregious earlier personal attack by the same IP - his first edit under this IP address. The second relevant edit by this IP (his 4th edit, still before saying anything on Nancy Reagan or its talk page) was to file a Wikiquette complaint against Happyme which was at best ironic, given the personal attacks the IP had made on Happyme. The complaint was rejected. It would appear, then, that this IP picked up where another IP or some other username left off, regarding Nancy Reagan and Happyme. (Perhaps 74.73.106.239 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) - see similarity of edit summary after which that IP was blocked.) Only then, after his Wikiquette post, did the IP make numerous posts on the article Talk page: a few of them were accepted, some were rejected, and most were discussed to the best of our ability given the volumes that were posted. There was no collusion or "teaming together" - we discussed and reached consensus on a few changes. One editor from the FAC (Karanacs) who was inappropriately canvassed by the IP (along with six other editors) came to the IP user's talk page to say that s/he thought the complaints were not justified. Discussions are going on among three editors other than the IP about one very small matter, but in no way should it jeopardize the FA status of the piece. When this started the article had not substantially changed since its elevation to FAC other than a few additions and tweaks - I believe it is still NPOV and worthy of its FA status, and see no reason for any mediation, nor do I intend to participate in it. Tvoz |talk 08:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

PS- I would prefer not to move this discussion to my talk page - I will monitor yours. Thanks. Tvoz |talk 08:54, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks. The first to diffs you gave me were the same, could you provide them again? I don't see this as so much a mediation of the article content dispute as a mediation between the parties as editors. It may not be worthwhile, but I want to give it a try. Thanks for being frank about not participating. You will probably want to watch the mediation case page as well.--Doug. 09:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry - I fixed the diffs. It's late here! I also clarified the above and added a few other diffs. I appreciate your willingness to help out, and I will watch it - I think that Happyme's summary on the mediation page is an accurate portrayal of what has gone on. Feel free to contact me on my talk or by email for any clarifications I can provide - I'm not trying to stonewall your good offices, I just think this is invalid and a potential time sink that has no merit. Tvoz |talk 10:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Doug; my story is very similar to Tvoz's and I won't be participating. I have two edits to the article since October, I have a grand total of 5 talk page edits, and I too noticed the personal attacks on Happyme22 when IP posted to Raul654's talk page and then posted false claims about me to seven user talk pages. I can't be involved in mediation for every article I've supported or opposed at FAC, as that would be in the thousands. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's ok not to participate. As far as I can tell there is a dispute resolution process and I have followed it appropriately, and there are further steps to be taken. I recommend that you follow Doug's advice and at very least monitor the mediation page as your edits and comments will be cited. 207.237.228.83 (talk) 21:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Doug, please see this post and my reply. Am I being threatened into not being able to use Misplaced Pages or complete my questioning of this article? Please advise. Thank you. 207.237.228.83 (talk) 01:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks from Happy-melon

I just wanted to say thanks for your support for my RfA, which closed (74/2/0) this morning. Your comment and support was very much appreciated. Happy‑melon 09:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

MFDs

Whoops, I did forget. Thanks for catching that for me. --Coredesat 21:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• WikiProject Biography newsletters