This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JBKramer (talk | contribs) at 15:29, 17 November 2006 (→Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject Newsletter: sign for archingi). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:29, 17 November 2006 by JBKramer (talk | contribs) (→Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject Newsletter: sign for archingi)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:JBKramer/Archive/Dec06. Sections without timestamps are not archived |
Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject Newsletter
| The project main page has gotten a facelift! |
|---|
| When people visit the project, the very first thing that they see tends to be the project's main page, and with this in mind, the main page has been completely overhauled. To enhance readability the various "goals" sections have been merged, and a detailed "how you can help" section has been added. To increase accessibility for more established members, the links to any resources that were in the main body text have been moved onto the navigation bar on the right. Finally, the whole page has been nicely laid out and given a nice attractive look. |
| New project feature: peer review |
| I'm proud to announce the addition of out newest feature: peer review! The MCB peer review feature aims serve as a stepping stone to improve articles to featured article status by allowing editors to request the opinions of other members about articles that they might not otherwise see or contribute to. |
| Project progress |
| The article worklist |
| We’ve had quite a bit of progress on the worklist article in the past month. Not only has the list itself nearly doubled in size from 143 to 365 entries, but an amazing three articles have been advanced to FA status, thanks in great part to the efforts of our very own TimVickers! Remember, the state of the worklist is the closest thing we have to quantifying the progress of the project, so if you get the chance, please take a look at the list, pick a favorite article, and improve it! |
| Collaboration of the Month |
| Last month's Collaboration of the Month, cell nucleus, was a terrific success! In one month, the article went from a dismal stub to an A-class article. Many thanks to all of the collaborators who contributed, especially ShaiM, who took on the greatest part of the burden. This month's Collaboration of the Month, adenosine triphosphate, isn't getting nearly the attention of its predecessor, so if you can, please lend a hand! |
| Finally... |
| The project has a new coordinator, ClockworkSoul! The role - my role - of coordinator will be to harmonize the project's common efforts, in part by organizing the various tasks required to make the project run as smoothly and completely as possible. Many thanks to those who supported me and those participated in the selection process. |
| ClockworkSoul, project coordinator 18:16, 21 October 2006 (UTC) |
| If you wish to opt out of having the newsletter posted on your talk page in the future, you may add yourself to the opt out list Newsletter concept and layout blatantly "borrowed" from the Esperanza newsletter. |
archsign JBKramer 15:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Permanent deletion of historical record for Ewart's RfC; even my own contribution history
Is this acceptable on a wiki? Even my own contribution history of edits at Ewart's RfC has been deleted. As you know the RfC was not vandalism. ottawaman 13:41, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Reponded on your talk. JBKramer 13:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
My question on the science reference desk
What's wrong with it? Why have you repeatedly removed it as vandalism? --84.68.125.122 13:34, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- User is asking idiotic questions about seagulls, disrupting the Reference Desk. His non-serious question is non-serious. JBKramer 13:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- What's with the attitude? Despite your assuming bad faith on my part, my question was serious and not intended as vandalism/disruption/trolling at all. --84.68.125.122 13:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- Of course not. JBKramer 13:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Ref desk
Thanks very much for your offer of assistance. Can you take a look at User:SCZenz/Reference desk removals, a page I intend to link to when I remove comments, and tell me what you think of it? You coulld of course use that, or your own variation, when you remove stuff. -- SCZenz 18:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- That's a valid point, and one I've thought about. My feeling is that I am implicitly using my authority as an administrator to insist that people not restore the comments, and that they have a right to claim that I'm misusing my position on that basis. Do you think this is wrong, or should I make it more clear, or what? -- SCZenz 18:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- How's it look now? -- SCZenz 18:56, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
RE: Medical advice
Thanks, but my question was about something that happened a few years ago, and it's out of curiousity, not necessity. I'm not sure it contravenes the medical advice rule... Sum0 18:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Re Thanks
Thank you for protecting the article. At some point, the wrong version will be the one I prefer, but in the meanwhile, hopefully discussion will break out. JBKramer 17:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- No worries. Well, logically and neutrally i had to restore the version just before the unprotection. Otherwise, my protection would not have made sense. -- Szvest 17:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Re: Miltopia
Sure. I suppose I figured such a condition was more or less common sense, but it wouldn't hurt to spell it out explicitly. Will do that in just a moment. Luna Santin 15:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
You are being used as an excuse to revert war.
User:SSS108, who desperatly wants information removed from some article about some indian guru is using your statement that individual incidents discussed in a Salon.com article should not be included in the article about some indian guru is actually a licence on his part to engage in revert wars in an attempt to remove all mention of said article - in fact, his most recent statement was that you are "the voice of consensus." I am frusterated and disengaging. JBKramer 20:05, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'll look at it. I don't usually have time, but caught up and bored. Fred Bauder 20:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Stalin
Yes, they probably are. :) //Encyclopaedia Editing Dude 22:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
RFA Thanks
| Thanks! | |
|---|---|
| Thanks for your input on my (nearly recent) Request for adminship, which regretfully achived no consensus, with votes of 68/28/2. I am grateful for the input received, both positive and in opposition, and I'd like to thank you for your participation. | |
| Georgewilliamherbert 05:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC) |
Democratic Underground dispute
I will take a look at that and post my opinion on the talkpage. Regards, KazakhPol 22:55, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal
Please see: Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-17 Religious opposition to same-sex marriage in South Africa. Thank you. IZAK 12:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)