| Revision as of 15:02, 21 June 2011 editMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 3 thread(s) (older than 14d) to User talk:Guoguo12/Archive 3.← Previous edit |
Revision as of 18:04, 21 June 2011 edit undoGuoguo12 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers11,589 edits Archived old conversations, left message Next edit → |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{RfX-notice|a|altname=Guoguo12 2}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
| algo = old(14d) |
|
|
| archive = User talk:Guoguo12/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
| counter = 3 |
|
|
| maxarchivesize = 60K |
|
|
| archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |
|
|
| minthreadstoarchive = 2 |
|
|
| minthreadsleft = 10 |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Usertalkback}} |
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome! |
|
|
If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes. A tilde is a "~" and the key for it is below the ESC key. Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
|
For past conversations, see ] and ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
{{My talk archives}}{{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot III|small=yes|age=14}}{{busy|small=yes}} |
|
{{My talk archives}}{{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot III|small=yes|age=14}}{{busy|small=yes}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{retired}} |
|
== WikiProject Wikfiy's April Drive == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Wikify/Drives/Invite/Apr11}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== My recent warning, apologies == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{talkback|Free Bear|Your recent warning}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== ''The Bugle'': Issue LXIII, May 2011 == |
|
|
|
|
|
{| style="width: 100%;" |
|
|
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" | |
|
|
{| |
|
|
| ] |
|
|
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; ">''']'''</div> |
|
|
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> |
|
|
* Project News: ''] |
|
|
* Articles: ''] |
|
|
* Editorial: ''] |
|
|
</div> |
|
|
|- |
|
|
|} |
|
|
|} |
|
|
<span style="font-size: 85%;"><center> |
|
|
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section ]. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the ]. ] (]) 22:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC)</span></center> |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with , but we should use only policy based language, such as "not yet notable" or "no article yet" in ]. --] (]) 02:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
| ⚫ |
:I must disagree. "Significance", or "why the subject is important", is used in policy; it is different than notability because it represents a standard ''lower'' than notability. See ]. <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 18:39, 7 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Two quick questions == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi there, |
|
|
I am currently taking part in your wikify June drive, also my first. I have been looking at the edits by some of the other editors, particularly those scaling the top of the leader board as it is, to see if i can find ways to speed up my own wikifying technique. My questions are in relation to some edit's i have spotted. Take this article for example ] by current board leader ]. The article is relatively small but could have been improved further rather than adding a bullet point next to the reference and counting it as wikified. For a start there could have been more wikilinks added such as "testify" and "custody", as an example. Please do not misunderstand as i am not trying to point a finger, but simply find out for myself if simple motions such as this count as wikifying an article. If this is so, it may help my own ranking on the leaderboard. Another question i would like to ask is on articles containing only 1 or 2 sentences is it allowed to just link 2 or 3 words and count it as wikified if it is not eligible for an infobox etc? This also seems to be quite a popular way of wikifying. |
|
|
Thanks for your help.<br /> |
|
|
] 23:57, 8 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:Hi, thanks for pointing out the edits by {{user|Kerowyn}}. I'll remind the editor to be more careful in wikifying, look over (or someone will) the users edits, and possibly disqualify any not fully wikified articles until they ''are'' fully wikified. As for the second question, on "articles containing only 1 or 2 sentences", ''yes'' adding just two or three links is okay as long as it is thorough—if it can be linked, it should be, bearing in mind the exceptions at ]. <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 02:13, 9 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
::After scanning through the user's log, I found that most of the articles completed were appropriately wikified. ] is okay—words like "testify" and "custody" are nearly plain English words, which should not be wikified per ]. If the user ''had'' linked "testify" and "custody", that would have been okay as well. <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 15:30, 9 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:::The only issue I found with the user's work, and Guoguo, you might want to mention this, is the failure to link the ''definition'' of the article. In other words, what was the Morrissey Hearing? It was a "legal proceeding". ''That'' should have been linked, if nothing else. As a general rule, x should always be linked in the format "(Article title) is an x", or "(Article title), born DOB, was an x". Those should always be linked, and I noticed that Kerowyn didn't always do that. ]]<sup>·</sup>] 15:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Ah, okay Nolelover, good point. I've notified the user about the stuff before but do go ahead and add the definition stuff, too. <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 15:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::{{done}}, and thanks for bringing this to our attention Bailo. ]]<sup>·</sup>] 15:52, 9 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Thanks. I just read your message and clearly you're better at this than I am. <small>It took me a long time to come up with words that didn't sound too harsh. But I forgot to use a smiley {{;)}}.</small> <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 15:56, 9 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::Heh, I've got some RL experience in that sort of thing, and yes, smileys make even the worst criticism bearable. ;) ]]<sup>·</sup>] 15:59, 9 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
::Hi all! Thanks for the help. It's good to know what I've been doing wrong. It happens not infrequently that all that is left to do is remove the wikify tag, especially if the article is a stub to begin with. The ] were almost all like that. ] ''<sup> ] </sup>'' 17:59, 9 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Altered speedy deletion rationale: ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello Guoguo12. I am just letting you know that I deleted ], a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. —] (]) 02:58, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:Back for ]? {{;)}} I originally tagged the page for deletion under ], which you deleted the page under. ''However'', you'll find that A1 "applies only to very short articles". I'd say no ''content'' (]) is more like it. The page very clearly had not content on it—only coding of some sort which I did not attempt to identify. I also threw in ], "patent nonsense", for good measure. It looked like "incoherent text or gibberish" to me—both, for that matter. But anyway, there's always ] and ], right? <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 03:07, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
::No, it wasn't "very short", so perhaps my rationale didn't exactly fit, either. It was ] code for something I wasn't able to identify, so it wasn't ], per se. In any case, if the author disagrees, they are welcome to appeal it. Cheers —] (]) 03:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Your analysis was spot on. I apologise for any inconvenience, it should be fixed now. I really should have given the script a once-over after your last message... sigh. Ah well. Thanks also to Bdk for fixing. - ] <sup>] ].'']</sup> 12:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:Thanks, Jarry1250. In any case, if it wasn't for your bot, the page would be completely devoid of interesting or useful information. <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 14:50, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== #2 == |
|
|
|
|
|
Just saw it on my watchlist. Good luck! ] ]<sup>·</sup>] 15:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:What? Really? You're actually watching that page? I didn't even transclude it correctly! But anyway, thanks! {{(:}} <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 15:29, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
::(I watch ]) Good luck. --<span style="text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">] <sup>]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-3.5ex">]</sub></span> 21:03, 17 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Ah, I see. {{thankyou}}. <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 00:34, 18 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Actually, don't hold your breaths, guys. I'll be too busy to start the RfA until tomorrow. <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 22:49, 18 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::<nowiki>*</nowiki>Releases breath, passes out* Hurry up! :D But in all seriousness, do make sure that you have plenty of time to devote to this - RfA is not a good week to be on WP for a minimal amount of time. <small>And yes, I was actually watching the page. Added it a few weeks ago - wanted to know as soon as anything happened. :)</small> ] ]<sup>·</sup>] 23:05, 18 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::{{done}}, see ]. <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 22:00, 19 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Your RFA == |
|
|
|
|
|
Good luck with your RFA. I know you'd do well with the mop. –]] 23:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:Thanks! <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 23:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Talkback == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
⚫ |
I'd appreciate no discussion of my departure. <span style="white-space:nowrap">] ]</span> 18:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
<div class="usermessage plainlinks">You have '''<font color=002BB8>]</font> (<font color=002BB8>]</font>).'''</div> |
|
|
<span style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:80%;">'''/]]]'''</span> 02:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
