Revision as of 14:55, 16 July 2012 editWhatamIdoing (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers121,699 edits →That: Thanks← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:03, 19 July 2012 edit undoWLU (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers52,243 edits →Note minor edit to your comment: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 666: | Line 666: | ||
:Excellent example. I've added it. Thanks. ] (]) 14:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC) | :Excellent example. I've added it. Thanks. ] (]) 14:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC) | ||
== Note minor edit to your comment == | |||
I part of your comment, for what should be obvious reasons. It's your comment so if you take umbrage you are free to replace it and I won't object. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 11:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:03, 19 July 2012
I'm approaching watchlist bankruptcy again. If you expected a reply on another page and didn't get it, then please feel free to remind me.
Please add notes to the end of this page. I'll probably reply here unless you suggest another page for a reply. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk)
Archives |
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
Quote Parameter in citations
You contributed to a discussion either here or here. I'm attempting to summarize and move the discussion forward here. You may well have this page watchlisted, but as I am trying to carny on in a slightly different place, I'm letting everyone know who contributed.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 17:04, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Help setting up translation task force
Hey WAID wondering if you know how to format some of this stuff for the translation task force It has been a few days and no bot has come along to fill in the assessment data.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:06, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Did you follow all the set-up directions? I don't see any evidence of the relevant categories there. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:47, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- No, thanks for the advice. Will see if I can figure it out.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Hum, looks rather complicated. Who at Misplaced Pages medicine has set up one of these projects before? I may need some help. Have posted here --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:44, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- It looks more complicated than it is. I think the list of instructions at WP:MEDTF is easier to follow. If you can't figure it out, then ping me tomorrow. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:07, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Yes that is definitely easier. I have tried to follow the instructions. Not sure if it will work though.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:05, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Seems like it works a little but not completely.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:29, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Yes that is definitely easier. I have tried to follow the instructions. Not sure if it will work though.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:05, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Following the steps exactly as indicated at WP:MEDTF#Task force creation guidelines will do the trick (you did not create any of the necessary categories), but I wonder if there is a better way to create this project. I just posed a bunch of questions at WT:MEDTF#Translation. I can lend a hand, but need to know more about your goals. Creating all of the categories is extremely tedious, and they might not even be necessary to accomplish your objective. --Scott Alter (talk) 04:17, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- It looks like you created the cats for WP:WikiProject Translation. I believe that the cats need to be named Category:Translation task force articles by quality for it to work. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Scanning speech
Thanks for reviewing this article. It's the first article I've created, and as I'm new to this I was just wondering if you had any pointers? Good stuff and stuff I can do better next time? Thanks Basalisk ⁄berate 23:24, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
- For a first article, I think it was really pretty good, and you should be pleased with your success.
- Are you familiar with WP:MEDRS and WP:MEDMOS? The first is about identifying the best sources for medicine-related information, and the second sometimes has useful suggestions about what to include or how to say things.
- Also, if you haven't met the folks at WP:MED yet, they're a great bunch, and I recommend keeping an eye on the talk page. It's a good place to get help and to find out what's going on. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Wiki problems
You've received a reply on user tabby talk page. Tabby (talk) 13:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Terms of Use
Just a note to say I liked 2 of your changes for s.10, and incorporated them into mine. The effect is both of us have suggested almost identical versions to Geoff.
I also proposed the remaining edits to s.12 which you said would be needed but hadn't written up. If you want to, go take a look and see what you think.
(The IP editor in that section appears to be listed on the SPI page for this banned user.)
FT2 15:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- It may take me a while to get over there today. I was partly building on your earlier comments in that draft, which explains the similarities.
- One thing I've been particularly happy about in this discussion is knowing that Geoff will ignore or improve my suggestions if they're not good enough. It's a delight to deal with an intelligent, committed, well-informed professional.
- It's amazing how certain people just can't believe that they've been banned, isn't it? WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:59, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- U must be a snake (chinese horoscope). Always looking for mischief. I was delighted to talk to an intelligent, commited and well-informed professional at the above mentioned discussion site too.--Angel54 5 (talk) 03:01, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Reminder — What the phrase means
Hi. Just a reminder re my last question in our discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#What_the_phrase_means. --Bob K31416 (talk) 15:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reminder. I have replied there. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:40, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, WhatamIdoing. You have new messages at Misplaced Pages:Village_pump_(idea_lab).Message added 18:52, 9 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
causa sui (talk) 18:52, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
One more, at Misplaced Pages:Village_pump_(technical) :-) causa sui (talk) 21:49, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Brain picking
I think I recall you mentioning a year or two ago that, when a policy and a guideline are found to conflict, the policy doesn't automatically trump the guideline, but the correct response is for a wide community discussion to reconcile the two. (Maybe it was SlimVirgin or SandyGeorgia; it wasn't a bloke.) If I'm right, is there anywhere I could go on project to confirm that that is the usual practice? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 15:04, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages:Policies and guidelines#Conflicts_between_advice_pages. NB that WP:V explicitly states that it trumps all sourcing guidelines; I have the (possibly erroneous) belief that this unusual provision is SlimVirgin's work. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:31, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you. Never die. Never leave. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 17:44, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Help with Edits to Internationals Schools Services
OpenMinds2010 (talk) 19:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)I wonder if you could help again with this article. You helped when I first wrote it. Someone has targeted it for deletion. I am not an advanced wiki writer but would like to keep my article and eventually make it better. The person who marked it for deletion looks a little sketchy but may still have the power to delete. Thanks for any help you can offer.
- I have removed the tag. The user in question does not have the "power" to delete articles; that's why he tagged it rather than deleting it. Deleting it would have required an admin to decide whether deletion under WP:CSD#G11 was appropriate.
- It appears that the user who tagged the article had a rather expansive understanding of "spam". However, it could still be deleted through the normal WP:AFD process. The best thing you can do to prevent that is to WP:CITE as many WP:Independent sources about the school as possible. It is rare for an article about a school to end up deleted if it cites a dozen sources (not counting the school's website or other sources with a close connection to the school). WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:12, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Spam G11
G11 spam doesn't have to be "try my product" written inside the article type of nature. Db-spam does include articles that is promotional in nature, such as nothing but highly postive reviews, what features it does and such, mainly written by a COI. I'm very conservative when it comes with CSD, usually following the example of other administrators, and being a former administrator for over four years myself. What I tag is with accordance with that. Thanks Secret 21:03, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- To qualify for G11, the articles must be exclusively promotional in nature, not just partly promotional, and a list of major features isn't "promotional": it's descriptive. (Think about it: how the heck would you describe (a very encyclopedic activity) a piece of software without listing its features?) I'm sensitive to spam problems, since I've been the most active editor at the External links guideline and noticeboard for years; I know what it looks like.
- Additionally, I know a good deal about notability requirements for organizations, since I've written most of WP:ORG. Both Misplaced Pages:Deletion_policy#Speedy_deletion and WP:CSD plainly state that no page, no matter what, should be sent for speedy deletion unless it has "no chance of surviving discussion" at AFD. Notable organizations always have a practical "chance of surviving discussion", by definition.
- Don't confuse "positive content" for "promotional". The fact is that "nothing but positive" is pretty typical of the reliable sources for some smaller organizations (just like "nothing but negative" is what you get for certain scandal-prone organizations). A 100% positive article may accurately reflect the reliable sources, and in those cases, only a 100% positive article complies with NPOV. Even if you think the balance is off, deletion is not a form of clean up. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:59, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
I replied back on my talk page. I know your work (I personally don't understand why you never did an RFA). I fully agree with you, except for the PHPmotion article. I just had my health issue right before I said my comment above so I didn't made sense here. Sorry about that. Now wikibreak. Thanks 184.33.223.182 (talk) 22:52, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- Mistakes happen; don't worry about it. I hope you feel better soon. I'll go take a closer look at the PHPMotion article. In fact, since it's been tagged for notability for a while, perhaps it should just go to PROD or AFD if I can't find any independent sources. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:18, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Good article help?
Hi. If you have time I would like your opinion on an idea I had for helping new good article reviewers. A first draft can be found here. It started off as an upgrade to the mentor page, but has now turned more into a help desk/noticeboard. I decided to get the advice of some GA regulars before announcing it at GAN. As you wrote much of the "what is not a good article essay" and answer questions regularly at the talk pages I thought you might have some ideas on the validity of this GA subpage and hopefully ways to improve it (plus would be willing to watch it if it is used). I would appreciate any comments you, or any of your interested talk page watchers, might have towards it either here or on the talk page. AIRcorn (talk) 10:31, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Boldly substituting a dictionary equivalency
Hi. Just to let you know that I responded to a message of yours at Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#Boldly_substituting_a_dictionary_equivalency. Regards, --Bob K31416 (talk) 01:06, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
- I apologize for the delay in answering; I've been mostly off wiki for a couple of days. I do appreciate your note here to make sure I saw your good suggestion. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:02, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Second paragraph of lead
Hi. Just to let you know that I responded to a message of yours at Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#Second_paragraph_of_lead. Regards, --Bob K31416 (talk) 13:33, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- FWIW, overall I recognize that your comments have been useful in developing the possible version. Regards, --Bob K31416 (talk) 17:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Templatify
Can you please add the 2.0s into the respective templates, please, per the discussions here. --Extra 999 (Contact ) 03:04, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
- I don't really understand what you want. The alternative images to be added to the templates? The alternatives to be listed at Misplaced Pages:Barnstars 2.0? (You could do either of these things just as easily as I could. They do not require special privileges.) Something else? WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:30, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
- Really, I am struggling to add the alt parameters in these templates, help. --Extra 999 (Contact ) 18:00, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
- It looks to me like you made one single effort a week ago, and then gave up—which is too bad, because what you did actually worked.
- The only thing you got wrong was the documentation, which requires
|alt=yes
, not just|alt=
. If you'll go look at Template:The Press Barnstar, you'll see what I did to fix the documentation. Also (unfortunately), you have to purge the cache to see the correct results. The easiest way to do this is to go to Special:Preferences, then to Gadgets, and tick the second item under "Appearance", which is "Add a clock in the personal toolbar that displays the current time in UTC (which also provides a link to purge the current page)." Whenever you need to purge a page, you just click the clock and wait a few seconds. - So your process is to do what you did originally for each of the files, except to add the
=yes
, save the page (which will definitely display wrong), and then click the clock to purge the page (and maybe reload the page a time or two). WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
DID Page
It's nice to see you there in the talk section. :) I hope you take some time and work on the article as well. We do need more people there and you seem more than capable.~ty (talk) 06:24, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Hello, WhatamIdoing. Please check your email; you've got mail!It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
SarahStierch (talk) 19:22, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Abortion exceptionalism
The article Abortion exceptionalism has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Not seeing this concept described by reliable sources; seems like original research.
While all contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:53, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Accounts
Is it possible that SlimVirgin has been using Dreadstar's account at WT:V? --Bob K31416 (talk) 19:51, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
- I seriously doubt it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:04, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Formal mediation has been requested
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Slide-rule". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 6 February 2012.
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 23:47, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Request for mediation rejected
The request for formal mediation concerning Slide-rule, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution.
For the Mediation Committee, WGFinley (talk) 23:22, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)
Thanks
For fixing that again. I think I had fixed it once before but someone reverted because I was involved in the Muhammad arbitration. ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 23:57, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- You're welcome. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:31, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Ongoing dispute clause?
Please direct me to the Rm stale POV tag per "ongoing dispute" clause you have been refering to. -- Cdw ♥'s ♪ ♫(talk) 00:14, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
- Second bullet point at the top of Template:POV/doc: "The editor placing this template in an article should promptly begin a discussion on the article's talk page. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant, then this tag may be removed by any editor." If you have noticed, I've been pulling tags that have been dated as far back as 2008. It is not even remotely plausible that discussions from several years ago are still active in 2012. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:46, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks I didn't know that. I learn something new every day. -- Cdw ♥'s ♪ ♫(talk) 14:49, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Misplaced Pages is such a sprawling, complex place that it's just impossible to know everything. I believe that the only way to make it work is by sharing the little bits we happen to know like this. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:26, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
External link request
Hello, you replied to my request for a link on the dementia wikipage Misplaced Pages:External links/Noticeboard I have replied to your reply but basically it's to say that you were right, I should request a link to be placed on the "caregiving and dementia" wikipage rather than the "dementia" wikipage and the link to be directed to the "care" category on the www.dementia.co.uk webpage rather than the homepage. I would be greatful if you could help resolve this matter. Thanks again for taking the time to read.John cordingly (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:19, 8 February 2012 (UTC).
Induced abortion at TNBC
Hi, I believe this is your specialty? Richiez (talk) 16:36, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- I apologize for the late reply. Actually, I generally try to avoid abortion-related issues, because the ratio of good editors to true believers (on both sides) is so bad. But I think you were right to revert it: the paper in question gives the same odds ratio of 1.4 for both triple-negative and all other forms of breast cancer, so it doesn't really seem to be a risk factor specifically for TNBC. (I wonder how much of that effect disappears when you control for the risk factors for having an abortion, like getting drunk frequently .) WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- I found it indeed rather surprising that those factors were not compensated for as it appears that young afro-american women of low socioeconomic status are at particular risk for TNBC, with predictable implications for abortion incidence. Unless some very solid evidence emerges I think it is better when abortion and breast cancer are discussed on the dedicated page. Richiez (talk) 18:51, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Would you mind when I reshuffle the sections again - I believe it is necessary to have classification above treatment because treatment is done based on classification (and I am trying to update/expand both). Btw metastatic breast cancer could use a radical sweep, getting the impression there is somehow way too many articles to keep in sync. Richiez (talk) 10:29, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
- Well, first of all, what's currently in the classification section is really histology/path information, not properly classification information. "Classification" is generally supposed to be something more like what is done under Hypertension#Classification or Diabetes mellitus#Classification, not a list of things like "Sometimes TNBC cells overexpress this protein" or "We can identify this disease by looking for this histopathology pattern".
- I also don't currently see any connection between the information in the classification section and the treatment section, so from the readers' perspective, they've been made to wade through highly technical (=confusing) information for apparently no purpose.
- That said, I don't actually feel strongly about it one way or the other. If you think it's better this way, then I'm okay with that. WhatamIdoing (talk) 10:44, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
- I hope to fix treatment to take pathology into account sometimes soon so the connection will be more obvious. Yes, it is not real classification, but some things have already turned out to be fairly important and others need to be added. Richiez (talk) 18:30, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
- Why don't we re-name the section to be a little more accurate? We could have a ==Histopathology== section, or something like that. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:23, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- Would be fine for now. I am gathering lots of information on classification and no idea what the section will look like when it is done. Richiez (talk) 18:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- Or we can wait until you've had a chance to finish reading things. There's no deadline, and a couple of days isn't going to make much difference. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:46, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Recognizability poll
WhatamIdoing, since you participated in a previous poll on the wording of the "recognizability" provision in WT:TITLE, your perspective would be valued in this new poll that asks a somewhat different question: WT:TITLE#Poll to plan for future discussion on Recognizability. – Dicklyon (talk) 05:11, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Ask, and ye shall receive: one candid opinion has been delivered. But you won't like it. WhatamIdoing (talk)
Counters
You have helped me in the past, so I thought you may be able to help me again. I used to use two counters. One, a global counter, that counted the number of edits I made. The other was more fine-grained. It counted the edits I made per Misplaced Pages entry and category of entry (e.g., the pages themselves, templates, the discussion of the page, etc.). The tools, however, expired. You can see my Misplaced Pages page to find those tools (I didn't delete them). Can you direct me to other counters I could use. Thanks. Iss246 (talk) 11:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
- Try http://toolserver.org/~tparis/pcount/index.php?name=Iss246&lang=en&wiki=wikipedia It appears to be the successor for Soxred's account. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:31, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you.Iss246 (talk) 17:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
More help with counters
Hello again. I used to consult an application site that counted how many hits per month a Misplaced Pages entry received. The site was http://stats.grok.se/, but is not longer operating. I wondered if you could direct me to another site that could do the same thing. Thank you. Iss246 (talk) 19:58, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- That's the only one I've ever used for page view statistics. It's possible that an inquiry (or a search through the recent archives; surely we're not the only people who used it?) at Village Pump (technical) would be produce an alternative, or at least some information about what happened to it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:01, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. I took your advice, and asked at the Village Pump (technical) entry. Iss246 (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Recent WP:MEDRS change
Hello, I made a comment on a month old discussion which you may not have noticed. It concerns the guidelines which now strongly imply that tertiary sources cannot be used to determine balance/due weight. I'd appreciate you taking a look. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mindjuicer (talk • contribs) 18:51, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Brilliant Idea Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for your help at the sources page. I have been rather floundering, for lack of a better word, in the insecticide articles regarding the use of good, solid primary studies in articles. Your advice is very encouraging. xxxooo (I'm a gurl too, so we can hug and kiss) Gandydancer (talk) 21:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for your note
Not that I don't believe you, but regarding ref styles, it seems odd to me, that the MLA article does not itself use refs with the URLs exposed. Nor did I see a sample containing a URL on the page, just as a visual example, as on other pages about ref styles. Marrante (talk) 06:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that the article about MLA style actually uses the MLA citation style (they might be, but at least the third one looks not quite right to me); there's no requirement that it do so. You can see their approach here. URLs aren't required (at all), but when they're included, the MLA style makes them visible and encloses them in angle brackets. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal: Request for participation
Dear WhatamIdoing: Hello. This is just to let you know that you've been mentioned in the following request at the Mediation Cabal, which is a Misplaced Pages dispute resolution initiative that resolves disputes by informal mediation.
The request can be found at Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/27 February 2012/Wikipedia:Verifiability.
Just so you know, it is entirely your choice whether or not you participate. If you wish to do so, and we'll see what we can do about getting this sorted out. At MedCab we aim to help all involved parties reach a solution and hope you will join in this effort.
If you have any questions relating to this or any other issue needing mediation, you can ask on the case talk page, the MedCab talk page, or you can ask the mediator, Mr. Stradivarius, at their talk page. MedcabBot (talk) 14:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Article restructuring at the Beatles
There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 23:34, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know anything about the subject and do not understand why you have invited me to share an opinion. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:39, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Image placement issue
I may have misunderstood the edit history, but I think this thread at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Images#Image placement: Reason? concerns an edit you made to the guidelines back in October. Just in case you miss it on your watchlist. All the best.--SabreBD (talk) 00:03, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Rhodium and Platinum
I picked your name out randomly from the edit history for Service Awards - congratulations! The metals for Senior and Master are mixed up between the descriptions and files names. SlightSmile 18:10, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- I put that issue where I should have in the first place, Misplaced Pages talk:Service awards so never mind the above. Regards and good to meet you.. SlightSmile 19:12, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Please remember to list at WP:CP
When tagging a page witgh {{copyvio}} please remember to also list it at WP:CP as described in the instructions in the template. The copyvio at Victor Anomah Ngu has only just been dealt with as those that deal with copyvios at WP:CP were unaware of it. A bot would normally automatically list anything that was not listed but this was down for several months and it's best it is not relied upon. Please also notify the user who inserted the text. Again instructions are provided in the template. Dpmuk (talk) 21:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Pregnancy trans-inclusivity
I'd enjoy you chipping in on the trans-inclusivity section of the pregnancy page. Triacylglyceride (talk) 20:43, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Well, no, you probably won't enjoy it, but I have added my two cents. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:55, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages Ambassador Project Help Request
Hey! Dylan, a Misplaced Pages Campus Ambassador here. We are working in an undergrad Theatre course at Louisiana State University and are creating four new articles on the plays we are studying. We have drafted them in our sandboxes and hope to move to live in the next week or so. The students are all first-time WP contributors and are looking for someone to give us feedback on their articles. We know they are not Good-Article status, but our objective is to get solid information up so these plays have a place on WP. Would you be interested in helping? You can find the articles here. We hope you can help! Dylanstaley (talk) 15:36, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but as it says at the top of the page, I'm busy in real life for at least the next few weeks. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:02, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Cancer
Thanks for you swift responses on the cancer page. --Zaurus (talk) 16:05, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
AlexNewArtBot etc
Hiya. Fixed I think. See my talk for details (if interested). fredgandt 01:25, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Otis Redding/GA3
I left a question for you on Talk:Otis Redding/GA3 . Thanks.--Ishtar456 (talk) 14:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for pinging my talk page. I have replied there to confirm. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Your and There
Are there boxes for "Your vs You're" and "Their vs There vs They're" you can add to your userpage? Your/You're misuse is one of my peeves.512bits (talk) 02:27, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
- Not to mention why so many know "a few" is two words but not "a lot".512bits (talk) 02:28, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
- You're probably looking for
{{user theretheir}}
and{{user youryou're}}
. I haven't seen one for alot, but I agree that it's a particularly irritating error. There are many more at Category:Grammar user templates. Please let me know if you spot any particularly good ones. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
- You're probably looking for
about serial extraction
Thanks for ur help with references. I really appreciate. Inline citations are something i hv been trying but cudnt get the hang of it. So if u cud help me with that, it wud be great. thanks again. Dr.neha sharma (talk) 11:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
- I've set it up, which is the first half, and now you have to tell the software which reference belongs to which paragraph, which is the second half. In between now and then, we've got the software confused with the half-done state of the citations, which is why it's throwing that ugly red error message on the page.
- Here's what you do:
- I named the five references by the author's last name (with dates for the two Graber books so we can tell them apart). The five magic codes are these:
- <ref name=Graber1996 />
- <ref name=Graber1994 />
- <ref name=Proffit />
- <ref name=Norman />
- <ref name=Kjellgren />
- So any place that you want a little blue number that links to the Proffit book, you just paste
<ref name=Proffit />
right at the end of that sentence or paragraph.
- I made a guess that the Kjellgren source is supposed to be connected to the first sentence in the history, so I added that the magic code for Kjellgren to that sentence, so you can see exactly what I typed here. Try to do the same thing for as many places in the article as you can. Feel free to leave me another note if you get stuck. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:32, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
hey thanx a lot. i hv made the necessary changes in the article w.r.t. references. u wr a great help. this is the first time ever in my life that i m using dis sort of computer language. i really hv no idea bout hw it works. trust me when i say it ws very tough and time consuming for me to hv written this article in wiki format. i hope i'll hv u around for my upcoming articles. hv a gd day. Dr.neha sharma (talk) 07:19, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
- You're welcome.
- You've made a good start, but I think you want to keep going, so that most of the information is associated with a source. You can re-use the "magic codes" as many times as you want, so if several different paragraphs in Serial extraction came from the same book, just paste that code in every time the source was used. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:06, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject Immunology
I see you have edited some of the pages within the scope of immunology. Please have a look at the proposal for a WikiProject Immunology WP:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Immunology and give your opinion (support or oppose). Thank you for your attention. Kinkreet 09:41, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Dispute resolution survey
Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello WhatamIdoing. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Misplaced Pages, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang 11:37, 5 April 2012 (UTC) |
Note ANI mention
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Correct place to issue a dare? WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/complex 21:18, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Please be kind
You may or may not have noticed some edits I made earlier today. I added this one beginning with the words "I certainly agree" because I noticed that I hadn't fully replied to all the points you'd raised. I also added this post to clarify my position and highlight that "I have worked to resolve a concern ... raised by WhatamIdoing." I also made it clear that I was sorry that I'd previously used some inappropriate words (now mainly struck out by me). Another example of how I've been trying to collaborate: before leaving for London yesterday morning I found the time to set out my proposal in a way that it would be comprehensible to anyone (and I've even raised a couple of critical points about it). So we have different opinions about what to do? Nothing unusual on Misplaced Pages! I invited "support/oppose or comment" for my proposal, but instead your reply subtly accuses me of not collaborating. Maybe you haven't realized that I regard this matter as a chore, and the only reason I've continued addressing the question thus far is a sense of duty not to drop a task I'd taken on. Sincerely, —MistyMorn (talk) 19:53, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for your note.
- I know that you're trying to collaborate with the folks at WPMED, and I, too, see this as simply one more chore to be done. But were you really trying to collaborate with the people who originally added all of that information to the article? They added verifiable information, albeit information that is less important than what you added. Does blanking their contribution seem like collaborating to you? WhatamIdoing (talk) 11:56, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for replying and acknowledging my gf. Perhaps we are both finding this frustrating because we're experiencing it as an annoying chore which is dragging on?
Yes, I was genuinely trying to collaborate and I even took the time to present the list you inserted in full sentences in a way that seemed to me to make it clearer to readers that these items were not just "other examples" of biotherapy, but were related to an alternative usage of the word. I then went back to the Med Project Talk page to discuss the matter (albeit rather clumsily at first). While discussing, I realized that my view that the two sets of material did not belong in the same article became even stronger, and so I went back to remove the sentences I'd patiently added, justify my thinking on the Talk page (at some length), and develop an alternative proposal intended to resolve the question without loss of content on Misplaced Pages. As I've explained, I believe that creation of the separate page is in keeping with Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, but I really don't know what would be the most suitable title for the page (Biotherapy (animal-assisted)??) I also think that separation of the two pages would actually facilitate article building. —MistyMorn (talk) 12:56, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for replying and acknowledging my gf. Perhaps we are both finding this frustrating because we're experiencing it as an annoying chore which is dragging on?
- Before I forget about this again, I've been trying to decide whether Fecal bacteriotherapy should be included on that page. WhatamIdoing (talk) 14:02, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Academic/Doctor Notability Question
Hey WhatamIdoing. I'm looking into an article on a prominent, well-published Llaryngologist. I'm not sure exactly about the precedents for articles on noted doctors, so I was hoping you could take a quick look at my draftpage and see if I'm in the ballpark. Great if you can, no problem if you can't. Cheers! Ocaasi 15:42, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- There's nothing organized for physicians. WP:PROF is probably the most relevant guideline, and her achievements make her sound notable to me, but let me say that a quick glance at the very generous length of your ref list makes me confident that it will withstand any deletion challenge. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks very much for responding. I was hesitant at first, but seeing that she has started and worked at leading voice centers, is on the editorial board of the leading publication, and is very well published in the field, I also think it would withstand a challenge. I'm being particularly careful here because I know this individual personally. I'm going to run it through AfC just to be on the safe side, and let someone else move it live when it's ready. Thanks again! Ocaasi 19:32, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Your HighBeam account is ready!
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:
- Your account activation code has been emailed to your Misplaced Pages email address.
- Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
- If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
- The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
- To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
- If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
- A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
- HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
- Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
- When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.
Thanks for helping make Misplaced Pages better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 21:06, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Donald J. Cohen
Would you mind assessing? Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:07, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Done B/Low. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:27, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks (that was fast :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:29, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Here's another: James F. Leckman. Not quite as much material there, or maybe I'm just pooped out! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Done C/Low. (As far as I know, there's no rule against you assessing your own, but I don't mind, if you'd rather not. BTW, all people are "Low" for WPMED; it's not a reflection on their inherent worth, etc.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:43, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- I feel better if I don't do that-- it never looks right ... thanks again! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:59, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
ELN
I have responded to your comments about www.doollee.com on http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:ELN. Thanks for your interest. Julianoddy (talk) 13:54, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Chemotherapy
Hi, WhatamIdoing. Have you seen my comments at Talk:Chemotherapy? Axl ¤ 09:53, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note. I've been off wiki for a couple of days. I'll take a look. WhatamIdoing (talk) 13:18, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons
Invitation to diacritics guideline discussion at WT:BLP | |
Hi, you were one of 100+ Users who has commented on a living person Requested Move featuring diacritics (e.g. the é in Beyoncé Knowles) in the last 30 days. Following closure of Talk:Stephane Huet RM, a tightening of BLP guidelines is proposed. Your contribution is invited to WT:BLP to discuss drafting a proposal for tightening BLP accuracy guidelines for names. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:04, 20 April 2012 (UTC) |
Feel free to duplicate this invite on the pages of others who have commented, for or against. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages Stories Project
Hi!
My name is Victor and I'm a storyteller with the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that supports Misplaced Pages. I'm chronicling the inspiring stories of the Misplaced Pages community around the world, including those from readers, editors, and donors. Stories are absolutely essential for any non-profit to persuade people to support the cause, and we know the vast network of people who make and use Misplaced Pages have so much to share.
I'd very much like the opportunity to interview you to tell your story, with the possibility of using it in our materials, on our community websites, or as part of this year’s fundraiser to encourage others to support Misplaced Pages. Please let me know if you're inclined to take part in the Misplaced Pages Stories Project, or if you know anyone with whom I should speak.
Thank you for your time,
Victor Grigas
vgrigas@wikimedia.org
Victor Grigas (talk) 23:36, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
suggestion to merge essays
WAID, there is a discussion at WT:Verifiability on whether to merge the essays WP:Truth, WP:Inaccuracy and WP:Verifiability, not truth (as they appear to cover very similar topics). Since you were a major contributor to one of these essays, I thought you should be informed of the suggestion... and have a chance to share your thoughts. Please join the conversation at WT:Verifiability#How many essays are there on related topics? Blueboar (talk) 12:10, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Possible navbox placement proposal
I would appreciate your comments and suggestions regarding this draft proposal: User_talk:Butwhatdoiknow/Sandbox Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 13:53, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- I think the primary objection to having navboxes in the ==See also== section is this: a long, colored bar effectively draws a line across the article and signals to the viewer that nothing beyond it is worth reading.
- Having you considered a {{Side box}} at the top of ==See also== that directs the reader to the usual location for the navboxes? WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:32, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Is this what you have in mind: User:Butwhatdoiknow/Sandbox1? I like it. Any suggestions for improvement (for example, better text to put into the sidebox)? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 18:45, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, exactly. Perhaps starting with "See more articles..." (a complete sentence) and maybe a small icon would make it look nicer? Or a larger font? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- I've made the text change but the sad reality is that adding an icon and changing the type size is beyond the limits of my knowledge. Would you be willing to make those improvements? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 20:04, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Well, I don't know how to do it, either. I'd probably look at {{sister}} or some other template that uses {side box} and see if I could copy from it. Alternatively, I believe there is a WP:WikiProject Templates, and they would know. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:08, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- I've made the text change but the sad reality is that adding an icon and changing the type size is beyond the limits of my knowledge. Would you be willing to make those improvements? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 20:04, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, exactly. Perhaps starting with "See more articles..." (a complete sentence) and maybe a small icon would make it look nicer? Or a larger font? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Is this what you have in mind: User:Butwhatdoiknow/Sandbox1? I like it. Any suggestions for improvement (for example, better text to put into the sidebox)? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 18:45, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
F.Y.I., your idea is taking root: {{Navbox link}} Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 22:39, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
- That looks nice. I hope that it works out. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Strange WikiProject proposal
I have come across a strange Wikiproject proposal: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council/Proposals/The 39 Clues. I cannot tell what this one is supposed to be about. It almost seems to be that the guy wants 2 separate wiki projects: one completely on him/herself (User:Alejandro Cambronero Albaladejo) and one on a book series that does not have very many articles about it. I want to say something yet there is no "Discussion" area. Could someone please help me with this. Personally I would take down the proposition, yet I don't have the authority to. Bloope (talk) 18:39, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've fixed the format. Probably he just couldn't figure out how to set it up. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks. That would be redundant wouldn't it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bloope (talk • contribs) 21:12, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- It seems that way to me. Of course, redundant projects are allowed... just not usually the wisest choice. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:18, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
WP:MEDRS
I am hoping to alter WP:MEDRS. Please comment here. Axl ¤ 19:43, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think I'll let other people have a chance to respond first, but, fundamentally, the problem with your proposal is Hoyle's law: Whatever the game, whatever the rules, the rules are the same for both sides. That is, whatever we let you do in assessing a source, we must also permit POV pushers and undereducated people to do.
- So you are unhappy with the source we're using as an example in this discussion (in part) because you disagree with its inclusion criteria (e.g., excluding hematological malignancies from their definition of cancer). Are you sure that you want to propose that, say, the folks promoting transcendental meditation be permitted to exclude peer-reviewed meta-analyses of TM on the grounds that they disagree with critical reports' inclusion criteria? Would you want a true believer in homeopathy to be able to reject apparently good sources for this reason? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:54, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- In the case of homeopathy and other "fringe" theories, multiple independent sources would trump a single rogue source. In every case, consensus would always apply. Axl ¤ 20:29, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- That would be relevant if we were talking about what to include in an article, rather than ways to remove information that the POV pusher disagrees with. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:05, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- If the consensus says "Source X is unreliable and shouldn't be used", that's what should happen. Axl ¤ 21:22, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- That would be relevant if we were talking about what to include in an article, rather than ways to remove information that the POV pusher disagrees with. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:05, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- In the case of homeopathy and other "fringe" theories, multiple independent sources would trump a single rogue source. In every case, consensus would always apply. Axl ¤ 20:29, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- That's basically my point: a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS doesn't override the community-wide consensus, which is that editors shouldn't be rejecting sources based on what the editors think would have been a better list of inclusion criteria, or whether they think that people faced with the facts about the small benefits of {chemotherapy | transcendental meditation | whatever} will choose not to undertake that program, even if they call that cherry-picking "deciding whether the peer-reviewed meta-analysis is a reliable source".
- To put it another way, I don't believe that it is possible to have a valid consensus to reject a source on the grounds that you disagree with it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:02, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Hatnote#Trivial_hatnote_links
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Hatnote#Trivial_hatnote_links. KarlB (talk) 18:57, 3 May 2012 (UTC)Template:Z48
Improving Immunology Articles
Hi WhatamIdoing, If you'd put your mind back a month or so, there was a discussion on the medicine talk pages about the proposal of a WikiProject Immunology. I have been having exams since then and so have not been active here, but now I am back. It seems the proposal do not have enough people to be a project, so now I am just happy getting an informal group of editors to improve articles in theImmunology category. If you are interested, please visit here and just start editing, and tell other people about this. I will do my best because I think there really are a lot of gaps in these articles. If you require any assistance please don't hesitate to contact me and all comments for improvement are welcomed. I hope you are interested and hope to be working with you soon. Kinkreet 00:30, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Dead link in article 'Chagas disease'
Hi. The article 'Chagas disease' has a dead link that could not be repaired automatically. Can you help fix it?
Dead: http://www.who.int/tdrold/publications/tdrnews/news65/chagas.htm
- You added this in May 2010.
- The bot checked The Wayback Machine and WebCite but couldn't find a suitable replacement.
This link is marked with {{Dead link}} in the article. Please take a look at that article and fix what you can. Thank you!
PS- you can opt-out of these notifications by adding {{Bots|deny=BlevintronBot}}
to your user page or user talk page.
BlevintronBot (talk) 03:57, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Watchlist
"Watchlist bankruptcy" - excellent phrase, I know the feeling well. (I didn't want anything, I was just passing through your page.) SpinningSpark 23:49, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
WP:EDITORS
I noticed you did some changes to the the page, WP:EDITORS in the demographics section. I have did some extra revisions, one way an extension of your edit. May I request you your feedbacks on my edits? etra999 (talk) 09:56, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- I appreciate your color change.
- I think that the items you added would be better handled as pie charts because there are multiple values. On the other hand, our pie charts are pretty bulky. (See Misplaced Pages:Graphs#Pie_chart). WhatamIdoing (talk) 14:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- So you mean, I should make pie/bar graphs of them? OK. etra999 (talk) 10:03, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks!
Helpful Hero! | |
Hello, and thank you to contributing to my Village Pump post. Even though we had conflicting thoughts, possibly a misunderstanding, thank you for contributing! THX, Ax1om77 05:43, 16 May 2012 (UTC) |
Many thanks
Many thanks for your calm and helpful intervention in the recent discussions on my talk page. Dahliarose (talk) 20:16, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- You're welcome! WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:27, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Help with accessing a jpg file
You have helped me in the past, and daresay thought you could help me again. I would like to download a photo from among the files stored in Misplaced Pages. The photo I would like to download is a shot of a horseshoe crab: http://en.wikipedia.org/File:Horseshoe_crab_female.jpg#filelinks
I would like to use it in a story I am writing about saving a bunch of horseshoe crabs that washed up on a beach. They were on their backs, and unable to crawl back into the water. I tossed them back in. I would like to download the photo but I'm not sure how I can do that. I thought you would know. Thanks.Iss246 (talk) 05:09, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
- It depends on what software you're using. Click here and then try right-clicking or ctrl-clicking on the image to save it ti your computer. Good luck, WhatamIdoing (talk) 13:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you.Iss246 (talk) 21:24, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Reply re COI/N
Hello. You have COI/N at Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Workers' Youth League (Norway)'s talk page. --Eisfbnore 09:01, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note. I'll try to look in later today. WhatamIdoing (talk) 13:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
- I've left another comment, should you have the time and inclination to look into the issue once more. Eisfbnore 17:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. I do, however, not agree with you and have left another comment. Eisfbnore 19:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- I've left another comment, should you have the time and inclination to look into the issue once more. Eisfbnore 17:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for sticking up for me in the COI discussion!
I'm very grateful for your defending me in the COI discussion. The state of Misplaced Pages pages related to Norwegian politics are unfortunately very lacking. The few who do take an interest in them, seem to have their own strong views and a very limited interest in any definition of neutrality outside of their political world-view.
I realise my own behaviour both in edits, summaries and discussions have been less than perfect, but I hope that you can sympathise when I say they are a result of a barrage of these sorts of unsubstantiated accusations. I actually had to give up contributing to no.wp full-stop since they do not have a good definition of what constitutes a COI. I will do my best to follow the example of constructiveness you set in these discussions. toresbe (talk) 11:09, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- You're welcome. My main purpose is to stick up for the limits of this particular guideline.
- I hope that you will keep making an effort to be constructive and to make sure that the voices of the critics are heard as plainly in the article as the voices of the supporters. Good luck with the complex task of finding a good balance. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:19, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Wikimania?
Hey!
Are you coming to Wikimania 2012 in DC? If so, please let me know.--Jorm (WMF) (talk) 00:22, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, wrong coast. But thanks for asking. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:03, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- Well, crap. Do you ever attend any west-coast meetups, then? I have a physical barnstar I want to give you. --Jorm (WMF) (talk) 20:34, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
edits
Those (not unbiased) reversions of *yours* were reversions of my *own* edits,so I have the right of way so to speak in objecting to them (ie by reverting them) You may take it to the talk section, it can their be discussed *prior* to any further revisions. I admit that my editing skills are sketchy but I am new. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.101.102.233 (talk) 01:27, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
- I see that you've been blocked for edit warring. If you come back later, then perhaps we'll be able to talk about why it's a problem to do things like changing the words in a direct quotation or describing dysfunctional nerves as "healthy".
- As for the "right of way": your right of way and my right of way are equal. Both of us made changes. Changes that add, remove, or change information are equal. It's not a case of first come, first served. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:24, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:You don't own Misplaced Pages
Congratulations, WhatamIdoing! This was the most demoralizing essay I have ever read on Misplaced Pages! Makes me realize how much a worm a mere editor is considered by the WMF, and your patronizing and self-righteous speech did its own part. Brought me one step closer to giving up contributing all together. Nageh (talk) 21:22, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
- I suppose that different people will find different ideas demoralizing. IMO the most demoralizing essay is probably one of the ones about how we treat subject-matter experts.
- (It sounds like you might want to consider a wikibreak to recharge.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:39, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)If you're up for it, I wouldn't mind taking a crack at some editing for trimming and tone. I could see how many users would see the essay as overly aggressive in making its point, with language like "delusion" and "egotistical power users." We're sort of name calling the essay's readers by default. It seems heavily editorialized, while taking an article-like stance on NPOV would make it crisper and more informative. My take. User:King4057 07:49, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- I have mixed feelings about this suggestion. I'm not actually trying to create a page that dispassionately outlines the formal and legal situation concerning control of the WMF websites. My focus is on the WP:DIVAs and other drama-causing attitude problems that we encounter. This particular attitude problem—the overly entitled, narcissistic power user who believes that everything ought to be done his way—is not unique to the WMF projects. It has been documented on similar websites, such as Flickr, and the field of change management exists (in the web world) partly because of the problems this particular group of users causes.
- I doubt that its readers take it personally. I suspect, in fact, that altogether too many of them instead think, "Wow, she's nailed the description of my opponent perfectly".
- So perhaps what you'd really like to do is to expand Misplaced Pages:Administration#Human and Legal Administration, which seems to be intended for a more official description. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:10, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- I wouldn't intend to re-focus the essay on strictly legal issues, but I think even the drama itself can be described in a neutral manner that doesn't invite more drama. We can communicate that power users feel a false sense of entitlement from privileges merely temporally granted to them to create a sense of community - pointing out a significant emotional and psychological event, without attacking users that fall victim to it. Where I was going anyway. I am not all that familiar with this topic anyway. User:King4057 21:50, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Cancer pain/GA2
Thanks for your comments there. Much appreciated. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 02:27, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Notability of academics
There are new posts on talk page for the notability of academics regarding the need for publicly available documents. NJ Wine (talk) 02:38, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Fringe, established facts and synthesis
In this discussion at WT:NOR it's not clear if you are aware that the point is whether we can use a source that doesn't mention a book to refute something in the book. I apologise if you were clear about this point, but I know that somehow I am not being clear enough myself to explain it, given some of the responses. Dougweller (talk) 14:38, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Authority Control Integration
Hi, I've been researching the intersection of Misplaced Pages and Authority Control, and have just recently made a Village Pump Proposal to create a bot to expand the usage of a template. I've identified you as someone in the sphere of interest to this project and would appreciate your input at the Village Pump. Thanks, Maximiliankleinoclc (talk) 18:37, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello, WhatamIdoing. You have new messages at Misplaced Pages talk:Good article nominations.You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Pyrotec (talk) 08:25, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Whatwereyoudoing
...here? --Redrose64 (talk) 14:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- Screwing up, from the looks of it. Thanks for cleaning up the mess I made. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- Redrose, I bet you enjoyed that. JFW | T@lk 22:30, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Invitation
Seeing as you responded to ConcernedVancouverite inquiry at the RSN, I invite you to my own at Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#A question:. I do wish to clarify on three things: 1) the journalist in question has the credentials and background establishing him AS an expert in the field, 2) a "financial interest" in the Shawn welling projects of which he wrote is minimal at best, and may not even exist at all. He has a much greater fianacial interest in the regular paychecks he gets as a jornalist, and 3) his reliability is worth consideration for more than just as sourcing awards from a film festival, as his writing about Shawn Welling's projects also brings the consideration of Welling being notable per WP:GNG and WP:FILMMAKER. Schmidt, 05:14, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Lamia (D&D)
Hello, as you took part in the 1st AFD for Lamia (Dungeons & Dragons), which closed on "no consensus", I'm bringing to your attention that after a second AFD with the same result, a discussion on whether to merge or not has opened on the article talk page. BOZ (talk) 11:25, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
May I have your help with article naming, please?
Hello WAID. Not sure if I've ever stopped by to thank you for all your help with the project. My memory is getting fuzzy. So I will just say thank you for all your help with Misplaced Pages's operations over the years, especially your help with policies and guidelines. Anyhoo, a user is asking if we have a specific guideline that discusses the process for best determining an article's title. An article for an "apple" is easy, but other article titles are not so clear cut. Could you please chime in at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (idea lab)#Research guidelines/tutorials for new editors? Thanks very much and thanks for your dedication to the projects. All the best. 64.40.54.184 (talk) 05:28, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you. 64.40.54.55 (talk) 05:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Your opinion?
Hi WhatamIdoing. Would you mind dropping a quick note at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch#Weasel punctuation stating your opinion regarding the possibility to include a paragraph addressing misuse of punctuation in the guideline? Thanks, Waldir 19:24, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
WP:village pump (miscellaneous)#Renaming categories of ex-Project that are now task forces
Ping, you have replies. --George Ho (talk) 06:24, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Conflict of interest guideline
I've been really busy writing an op-ed for the Signpost, contributing to a new COI essay, looking at duplicating the AfC process for request edits (though that may be beyond my technical abilities) and having some pretty lengthy conversations with users interested in the subject of COI, where I feel we're all learning from each other and finding good compromises.
At the end of the day though, the COI guideline is the front and center quarterback and the RfC was unproductive. I actually thought the guideline was fine, until I started hearing all the questions from PR people and realized just how confusing it is. I thought I would poke around and see what the chances are of us organizing a posse to go through it line-by-line and just improve/clarify (not drastically change, but just improve). I'd be happy to help out as a sort of representative of the dark side. Am I just shooting for the moon here in thinking we can organize and mobilize? ;-)
See my similar suggestion to round up a posse with Ryan hereUser:King4057 (EthicalWiki) 22:56, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- If you tell everyone that you intend to go line by line, I wouldn't expect it to work. If you identify one problem and solve it (especially if that one problem is not in the lead), and then, after a pause, "just happen to" identify a second problem and solve it, and so forth, moving very slowly, then you might succeed, but it might take about a year. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:35, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- A year might be a good timeline. What do you think about going through it one problem at a time? ;-) I noticed a couple people tried to re-write the whole guideline - didn't work. User:King4057 (EthicalWiki) 02:15, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- Trying to blow up everything won't work. One problem at a time is good.
- One challenge with writing policies and guidelines is that specific phrases sometimes exist for particular purposes. Unless you've been hanging out with the page for a long while, you won't know which phrases are just words and which phrases are essentially magic anti-problem-user incantations. You might start at COI by trying to add something that's missing, rather than trying to remove or replace something. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:49, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
RE: Eyes
Now on my watchlist. Good job BTW. Cresix (talk) 01:49, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
VP proposals
I found your neither your ES nor the comment about your personal feelings to be particularly helpful. Perhaps if you could explain the relevance (if any) of your message to the proposal statement, I may be able to address your concerns. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:57, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
- Your proposal is: every time someone tags an article with a cleanup template, your bot spams a welcome-and-cleanup-notice message to the author's user talk page.
- My concerns with your proposal include, but are not limited to:
- How do I keep your bot from pestering me?
- How does your bot figure out who is inexperienced (and thus might benefit from such a message)?
- How will you handle tagbombing? That is, if someone tag-bombs an article with six different cleanup tags, are you going to have your bot spam six separate welcome-and-cleanup-messages on the poor user's talk page? Only provide notice of the tag at the top of the list? Use a vague "hey, there are some tags" notice? WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:29, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
- The bots won't pester you if you will take the trouble to read the rules and create proper pages to start with - you've been around long enough to know how to create pages that won't be tagged, otherwise I fail to see how or why you merited a CEO's barnstar. Secondly - please read the proposal correctly before raising questions about solutions that are looking for a problem; sidetracking doesn't help the already flawed system of Wiki-style discussions. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:35, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- No, I don't: I do not know how to create a page that will never be tagged by any wandering idiot. Do you?
- I did read your proposal. I do not support it, but my lack of support and my list of concerns about its potential for being disruptive does not mean that my concerns are irrelevant. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:40, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
That
Another one for you. "He that is down needs fear no fall..." John Bunyan. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:30, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- Excellent example. I've added it. Thanks. WhatamIdoing (talk) 14:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Note minor edit to your comment
I removed part of your comment, for what should be obvious reasons. It's your comment so if you take umbrage you are free to replace it and I won't object. WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/complex 11:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)