User talk:Alsee/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Alsee. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
RFC?
Where is the RFC for https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_potentially_habitable_exoplanets&type=revision&diff=731412511&oldid=731361386 this one]? By that rationale the ESI article should be AfD-ed. Nergaal (talk) 15:07, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Nergaal. The RFC is at WikiProject archive Is_the_use_of_the_ESI_Score_Unencyclopedic?. Consensus is that ESI values should normally not be included in articles other than Earth Similarity Index itself. It does have sufficient sources to establish notability for itself. The issues are that it has very little acceptance in the scientific community, it is not a single well defined formula (different sources can give conflicting values), the calculations often involve guesses for unknown values, entire articles were being built around the ESI values from a single source and effectively promoting ESI, and it was used in a way that created potentially misleading implications about "habitability".
- So Earth Similarity Index is a legitimate notable article. List of Kepler exoplanet candidates by ESI is not notable... it became a redirect to List of Kepler exoplanet candidates in the habitable zone. That list no longer mentions ESI because including ESI values there gave undue weight to weakly sourced fringe scientific concept with little encyclopedic value for readers. Alsee (talk) 21:56, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you but...
I've removed your additions to the personal essay I wrote, which is based entirely on my own experiences and opinions, and is not intended to be all-encompassing. If you like, you could add a link to the Mediawiki page at the bottom under the heading "See Also", but I object to having anything not based on my personal experience included in this essay. It's for this reason that I keep it in my userspace. Risker (talk) 06:24, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Risker. My edit was a wp:bold attempt to help, your revert was entirely reasonable. Okey dokey. Alsee (talk) 06:30, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Citation for Mandy Capristo
You added Mandy Capristo "Just The Way I Like" to the Dave Aude discography page but there doesn't seem to be a trace of this on the internet other than wiki itself and sketchy russian sites. What's the source for this? 24.200.116.176 (talk) 04:55, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi 24.200.116.176. It looks like you slightly misread the article's edit history. I made this edit pointing the Ikon link to Ikon (Australian band), and pointing the Exodus link to Exodus (American band). The song "Just The Way I Like" was added in the edit right after mine. That edit made by IP address 2.93.56.228. I can't really help here, except to so that it's ok to remove unsourced information if you think it's wrong. Alsee (talk) 01:32, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you 24.200.116.176 (talk) 03:26, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
High-performance sailing: Directly down wind faster than the wind (DDWFTTW) vehicle
Hi, Alsee. There is a proposal for new text at Talk:High-performance sailing#Proposed new text that you may wish to comment on. Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 20:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Euphoria
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Euphoria. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
Changes this week
- ElectronPdfService will be enabled by default on Meta and German Wikipedia. This is a new way to get articles as PDF files you can download. It will come to more wikis later. [2]
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from January 31. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from February 1. It will be on all wikis from February 2 (calendar).
Future changes
- The Community Tech team will develop more tools to handle harassment of Wikimedia editors. The goal is to give the communities better tools to find, report and evaluate harassment. They will also work on more effective blocking tools. [3][4]
The Wikimedia technical community is doing a Developer Wishlist survey. Developers can propose ideas before 31 January 23:59 UTC. This is soon.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
18:45, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Doxycycline
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Doxycycline. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:JavaScript templating
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:JavaScript templating. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Problems
- The block log sometimes showed blocks as being much longer than they were. This has now been fixed. [5]
Changes this week
- Wikimedia pages will now be better at showing pictures when you share them on social media. The descriptions will be different too. You can see an example of before and after. [6]
- There are some changes to the OOjs UI. Some old functions will not work anymore or not work as they used to. This could be a breaking change. [7]
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 February. It will be on all wikis from 9 February (calendar).
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 7 February at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- Tidy will be replaced later this year. Instead, the HTML 5 parsing algorithm will be used to clean up bad HTML in wikitext. This will cause problems on a number of wikis. They need to be fixed first. You can see if your wiki still has something to fix here for one of the HTML problems. This list does not cover all problems. You can read about more problems. [8][9]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
19:45, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Invitation to join the Ten Year Society
Dear Alsee/Archive 2,
I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more.
Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 01:32, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Assistance
I'm still mystified by the communication style here. Thanks for your assistance. I am slow at doing this and am trying to get familiar with referencing style.
There is a guy at our public library who could help if they put together some sort of tutorial but that has not happened since he is a call-in for vacations and such. Just reading screens for me is fatiguing and so I have not gone through the many pages and walk-throughs at wiki.
loninappleton@milwpc.comLoninappleton (talk) 17:31, 12 January 2017 (UTC) (Message moved from User page to Talk page.)
- You're welcome :) I'm happy to help if you have questions about anything.
- The communication system here is rather unusual. Our Talk pages are actually article pages! They just have a different web address. That means that anything that works in an article, works here, in exactly the same way. You can use sections, links, images, references, and a lot more, the same way you'd type them in an article. This makes our Talk pages very powerful, and very useful for doing article work. If you copy-pasted your draft article here, it would look exactly the same.
- There's something else you didn't quite pick up on yet. As you might have noticed, all of our article pages have a talk page. For example the article Pizza has a matching page talk:Pizza. User pages work the same way. The User page is where people put information about themselves, and the matching User_talk page is where where we have conversations like this. If you look at your own signature: Loninappleton (talk), clicking on "Loninappleton" goes to the page where you described yourself. Clicking on the "(talk)" link goes to your messages page. Here's the wikitext of your signature: [[User:Loninappleton|Loninappleton]] ([[User talk:Loninappleton|talk]]). The first link is User:Loninappleton, which displays as "Loninappleton", and the second link is User_talk:Loninappleton, which displays as "(talk)". Hopefully that mostly made sense. Alsee (talk) 21:37, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes I think that should help. A long way to go with this.
Perhaps you can say why when I look up the book itself on wiki there is a big error message over the top of the entry, but the entry was not pulled. Many entries exist with their errors uncorrected. Mine remains in Draft. Why is that ?
Also by the way I just screwed up the tilde thing and made some bogus
random number account to myself. But they've always said you can;t break wikipedia. This is a talk page. Here are the tildes.2602:301:77E9:1600:C52C:66FC:2043:60D7 (talk) 07:09, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
This is good to know. In my defense the film was accepted at the Internet Archive as noted. And I subsequently found a review from the New York Times by the noted film critic Vincent Canby. Whether there is
any more of those sort of thing.... Well it leads me to another question of relevance. JSTOR has the drama journal called TDR (The Drama Review) which published during the period in discussion. There was a piece or two which can be searched but not obtained from JSTOR. To get JSTOR permissions you have to have academic credential or 1000 wiki edits. I'm on the trail of a text about street performance where the Living Theatre is mentioned as well. As an archival document of theatre as political movement I think it is significant.
I'm still not clear on the talk postings as to sequence. Yours goes to mine and mine goes to yours but not sequentially. No tildes this time.
The last one looks screwed up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:301:77E9:1600:C52C:66FC:2043:60D7 (talk) 20:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- Loninappleton, I apologize if I made Talk pages more confusing. I didn't want to overload you with too many explanations at once, and I didn't want it to seem like I was blaming you for not knowing yet how things are usually done. I'll go over some helpful details.
- First, you should log in. It helps a lot. Right now you aren't showing up as "Loninappleton", you're just a number. Some things don't work when you're not logged in. Here's the login link. Enter your username and password.
- The simplest and most certain way for someone to get a message is to put it on their talk page. I posted on your page to make it as easy as possible for you to get it. However, as you noticed, it's a mess splitting the discussion into two places.
- The normal way to make sure someone gets the message is to include a link to their name. I started this message with [[User:Loninappleton|Loninappleton]]. That link to your user page sends you a notification. (We sometimes call it a ping.) If you log in, you should find a red number at the top of the page. Clicking that number will tell you that I mentioned you on this page. If you click that listing, it will load this page so you can read my message. Then we can talk in one place, with notifications whenever there is a new message. If you leave a talk comment anywhere on Wikipedia, if you include [[User:Alsee|Alsee]] or simply [[User:Alsee]] in the message, AND you sign the message with four tildes, then I will be notified. This is what you want.
- Another (poor) option is for someone to add the page to their watchlist. I'm not sure if you found watchlists yet. When I check my watchlist it shows me all new edits to the watched pages. I added your talk page to my watchlist because I knew you were new. Most editors won't watchlist your page, and people don't check their watchlists as often, so you don't want to rely on this.
- If you start a line with a space, that line gets shown inside a box. You did that a few times. I don't think that's what you wanted. If you start a line with a colon it will indent the message. That's how we normally do replies. The next person can use two colons to indent it more, then the next comment starts with three colons.
- Regarding your draft: Wikipedia's philosophy is that're we're open for anyone to jump in and contribute. Unfortunately we do a really crummy job of helping new people. There's no easy way for you to know in advance whether your draft would be accepted. You put a lot of work into it, and if you can show the movie satisfies WP:Notability_(films) then we accept it. If the film isn't notable then we decline it, you and your draft just disappear into the sea of other new users. It's sad how many new drafts fail. I'm really hoping you succeed. Unfortunately Internet Archive doesn't really mean much. I think they accept almost anything. I could grab a camera and make a junk "film" of my dog, I could show that film in my garage, for my friends. But that film doesn't belong in an encyplopedia. What you need to do is show that the world already cares about the film in your draft. You need to show that the world has already taken note of it, that the world already writes about it. Significant reviews, major distribution, awards, news or magazine articles discussing it, books discussing it, anything showing that the world considers it noteworthy. A paragraph in a magazine article would get you part way there. If it's a small film that has gone largely unnoticed by the world, the only real fix would be if the film becomes notable in the future. Then the draft could be revived, new references could be added, and it would be accepted. You could always try a new article topic, now that you have an idea what "notability" means here. Alsee (talk) 22:57, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- Followup: The New York Times review will definitely help with Notability. You also mentioned wanting to search JSTOR. If you check Category:Wikipedians_who_have_access_to_JSTOR you'll find a list of people who have advertised on their user page that they do have access. You should be able to find someone willing to do the search for you. Try some random names, check their talk page to see if they're active and if they seem willing to help. Be sure to include whatever information you can to make it easy for them to find what you need. Alsee (talk) 23:36, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- Followup followup: You could try asking User:NinjaRobotPirate. (Actually, that link to their user page just notified them to come check this discussion.) They have JSTOR access and an interest in film articles. Brief summary: This is about Draft:Signals_Through_The_Flames by new user Loninappleton (they also made the IP comments above). The hope is to help establish notability. Loninappleton says JSTOR has the drama journal called TDR (The Drama Review) which published during the period in discussion. There was a piece or two which can be searched but not obtained from JSTOR. Alsee (talk) 23:58, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Loninappleton: I checked JSTOR, but it's tough to find anything. The only direct hit for the film's title I got was this book, which I can't access. It seems to be about off-off-Broadway and has a chapter with the same title as the film. However, there's also good news! The American Film Institute has a database entry for this film: link. This entry cites three other sources, including The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and Variety. The latter two articles don't seem to be available online for free, but they should be accessible somewhere through paid archives. Unfortunately, I'm not sure where. There are also a number of hits on Google Books, some of which have a few pages visible for free (link). NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
No more spaces at beginning of line. You have given a lot of help and
if I don't respond promptly it's because I'm absorbing or printing. I've mentioned reading screens is just a personal problem. The film was done after the very active period of the principals though the theatre group continues to this day. I think I tried the Village Voice as a likely source as well. You see, I saw and participated in the local presentation
of their work at the university here in Wisconsin US. The cops were there in case of any breaking of obscenity laws. Here again I consider this 'notable' but it would be hard to get archived info from the local paper. You are right about Internet Archive only because their content is not captured by copyright and therefore is perhaps a mile wide and an inch deep. It's the issue of the film proper that seems to have these notability issues, not the known actions around the world that the
group performed-- most notably at the Paris uprising of 1968-- footage of which is contained in the film. That's what's hard to resolve in my estimation. I have some other leads. But this is my only real entry. I'm just a civilian with this particular interest.2602:301:77E9:1600:C52C:66FC:2043:60D7 (talk) 20:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
My progress. I read the notability section and with what we've discussed I think an item found -- one not from the internet (there's a review at Rotten Tomatos) is a text, an academic tect called The Cambridge Guide To Brecht where the film is specifically mentioned. Google books has a page shot of it ( I can supply that but not going to clutter up your page. and Our State University at Madison has copies. I'm nowhere near there and I have no Google books account either. What's been hard for me is to get the idea of notability for the film in discussion for the article vs the Living Theater itself as an historically important subject. How can I work this Cambridge reference into the article? Google books ref is here: https://books.google.com/books?id=89GRrGQlmc4C&pg=PA286&lpg=PA286&dq=review+of+film+signals+through+the+flames&source=bl&ots=WANfyCv3r2&sig=rIgsW5m9MCOG9cJ_k_7Z7XSZ-e0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj01sfpu-HRAhXHz1QKHd_5DZgQ6AEISTAI#v=onepage&q=review%20of%20film%20signals%20through%20the%20flames&f=false Library reference is here: https://www.wiscat.net/MVC/#fullrecord/fr/cambridge%20companion%20to%20brecht/e026c874-fc6c-46ed-880e-ac77cf3ec881,0,20,0,1,bks,1/38303/0 Those urls are humdingers but Wiscat for the library system in Wisconsin US is one of the first to adopt interlinked libraries online. BTW I do know who Bertolt Brecht is, have followed the work myself in adult life.:-) I'd like to see this volume myself. May be able to get it or maybe I can't since it is an academic holding. Loninappleton (talk) 04:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Loninappleton An update to Assistance. I have contacted NinjaRobotPirate on the article with regard to thanks for proper attribution of the edit made and asked about other formatting. In this message I have a question on refs and how they are numbered in sequence. It is clear I have to go back to the top and add the inline refs to the title of the film on the first line. That would be the refs I have accumulated since the Sandbox. Do those auto number in sequence or is there a manual way to reorder or is that even necessary? I continue to review your notes to me.Loninappleton (talk) 21:48, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
- Loninappleton, refs auto number. When you put <ref>...</ref> in the middle of your text, that becomes [1], at that location. The next ref becomes [2], and so on. You don't need to think about the numbers. Just put each <ref>...</ref> after the sentence it supports.
- On talk pages, you don't need to put the link to your own name. I link to your name so the software notifies you that a message mentioned you. Then you can link to my name, so that the software will notify me that a new mentioned me. I saw on NinjaRobot's page where you tried to mention me. You didn't quite get it right. You typed this: [[Alsee]]</wiki>. That is a link to an article titled Alsee. (Which doesn't exist, grin.) What you want is <nowiki>[[user:Alsee]]</wiki>. That is a link to the user page for Alsee. <nowiki>[[user talk:Alsee]]</wiki> is a link to the talk page for user Alsee. <nowiki>[[Signals Through The Flames]] would be a link to an article page, Draft:Signals Through The Flames is a link to a draft-area page. Alsee (talk) 00:41, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
user talk:Loninappleton thanks you for the answer. I made a text file first for all the copying. I can only do these things by rote and corrections. Advise of mistakes.2602:301:77E9:1600:C52C:66FC:2043:60D7 (talk) 04:29, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Alsee, I have not given up on the entry. But I did have a computer failure which sent me spinning for a while. Today I was trying to use the URL template. I found the American Film theater entry for 'Signals through the flames' and entered it in the fill-in form. Elsewhere the Wiki notes say that the URL should or could autofill in needed info. It did not appear to happen so I did not save the change. I still have to view the how to use the templates video. I have no idea what fields like 'name' refer to: my name? someone else's name? The only template fields that make any sense are URL and date accessed-- which has to match the save and submit (to Wiki) date. That catches me up.Loninappleton (talk) 19:48, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- Loninappleton, it will be easier to explain if you post the American Film theater URL here, first. Then I can put it into the form and exactly describe each step. Alsee (talk) 20:17, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for reply. I went ahead and entered the URL and used the autofill icon. That gave the root URL for the American Film Theater. I also reviewed the format for date and entered today's date. I deleted what I considered the 'commenting' I did in the entry for brevity. The auto-numbering was successful.
The other book reference for the film called The Cambridge Companion To Brecht has been hard for me to locate even through the local library. I would still pursue that. It has been a month since I submitted this entry for review.
Could I re-submit with the current info?Loninappleton (talk) 20:59, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Alsee Answering you at your own talk so it doesn't get lost. You have my gratitude for the help with this submission. I do not know if there are other refinements to do with the entry for 'polish.' What was the info about the film still being shown? I understand that it could be shown for coursework and an historical referent of the experimental theater movement. But I encountered it at a vhs rental store in Wisconsin. It was likely 'remaindered' and sold with the close of the Mystic Fire bookstore and churned into 'Family Video' where I found it by accident. This gives me interest in doing more where I can with my limited knowledge. I added a couple cd titles to a German jazz musician's Wiki and they said at that entry the cds can be added to Wikipedia some way. Apologies for the 'box problem' again. I can't get used to not indenting and allowing white space.2602:301:77E9:1600:3DA9:7AAF:496B:49DB (talk) 03:08, 8 February 2017 (UTC) Well I am logged in this time and should have no sending errors as happened in the previous. The admin tells me the entry posted is an orphan. I can make links to it when I know how. But here I have an editing question: The title should say Signals Through The Flames (film). And the other admin made a spelling error where "performed" was meant rather than 'preformed.' Advise on how to politely make corrections. LonLoninappleton (talk) 06:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
- Loninappleton, The Segal Theatre Center and Yale School of Drama have given public screenings of Signals pretty recently. You can find that info and the references in the article now.
- I moved the article to Signals Through The Flames (film). I polished the IMDB links. I de-orphaned it. I edited the articles The Living Theatre, Julian Beck, and Judith Malina to mention the documentary and to link to it. In fact you may want to edit those articles to say more about the documentary. I also searched and found the film was mentioned in World of Culture, I made that a link there too. If you want to add a link somewhere else then it should usually be done like this: ''[[Signals Through The Flames (film)|Signals Through The Flames]]''.
- I'm about to explain one of the amazing things about Wikipedia. The "admins" you mentioned, they aren't admins. They're editors just like you. Signals is a real article now, and you're a real editor with essentially equal editing rights as anyone else. The only difference is that they have been here longer so they know more. If spot that a new article is an orphan, you can be the editor putting the orphan message on their article :) You can do that right now. If you make a few hundred good edits and you learn Wikipedia policies along the way, you can review and approve someone else's draft :) An admin is just an experienced editor who is trusted with a few extra tools like the article-delete button. If an admin puts faulty information in an article, you can fix it. If an admin adds "This film sucks", you're allowed to revert the admin's edit for being unsourced, for being a personal opinion, or other good reasons. If you make several thousand good edits, if you're good at understanding and respecting Wikipedia policies, you could become an admin. Your reward for becoming an admin is that we allow you to be an unpaid-janitor, cleaning up the garbage around here. Chuckle.
- Don't be afraid to make edits to the Signals article or to other articles. We have a guideline literally named Be Bold. Boldly fix things, boldly improve things. As long as you're trying to help, edit boldly. If another editor disagrees with your edit, and they give a policy reason, that's ok. That's how everyone learns around here. Someone cites a policy, you accept it, you learned something, and everyone just keeps editing. Pretty soon you cite a policy to someone else, fixing or reverting their edits.
- Here's two tips for when you reply right now. Click
Show Previewbefore you save. You'll see if your username is a number, or if our message is in a box, or if it isn't indented how you want. You can fix it and preview again before saving. The other thing, the way to indent is to have a colon at the start of the line. This message is a reply to you, so I started each line with one colon. When you reply right now try putting two colons at the beginning of each new line. Like this ::Hi Alsee! Two colons means indent twice. That will make it look like reply to me. Alsee (talk) 16:02, 8 February 2017 (UTC)- Alsee, this is much more help than I expected. I'll review all the polish you've given. In my experience with trying to learn Linux (failed) I got the idea that the regular users were a club and got tired of repeated noobie questions. This has not happened in Wikipedia and I thought I should note the polite and respectful treatment to me as new user.
- Recent showings are of importance to me since this is political theater and Signals shows political actions such as the occupy of the Odeon Theater. There's a brief youtube on that story from the Paris uprising of 1968. I'm not in the academic community, I simply have these interests. Again your more skilled searches are appreciated.Loninappleton (talk) 19:57, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
- Loninappleton, nice. You got the reply format right. My message has 3 colons, so your next message should use 4 colons. Tip: If there's more than a few colons, don't bother counting them. Just use the mouse to copy-paste the last person's colons, then add one. I'm not sure if you've caught yet the username-link thing yet. If this weren't my userpage, you could copy-paste the [[User:Alsee|Alsee]] from my signature into your message, to notify me. Do you understand why is says "Alsee" in there twice? And that it would also work with just one "Alsee"?
- We're usually pretty good at giving drive-by answers to newbie questions (if they find somewhere to ask it), but it was pretty random and lucky that you had someone take an extended interest. Usually people make an edit or answer a question, and just move on to the next hundred pages. Wikipedia is huge. New drafts is just one corner, and that corner alone currently has 493 draft needing review. It's hard to invest time into them individually. New users trying to submit a draft often just get cryptic 'declined' messages each time. Alsee (talk) 21:21, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Collective punishment
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Collective punishment. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- EventStreams is a new way to show activity on Wikimedia wikis. For now it works with the recent changes feed. It will do more things later. It will replace RCStream. Tools that use RCStream should move to EventStreams before 7 July. [10]
Problems
- The Firefox add-on Firefogg can cause problems with the Upload Wizard. This will not be fixed, because Firefox will not support Firefogg in the future. The Upload Wizard will no longer work with Firefogg. [11]
- Tool Labs and Wikimedia Labs databases will be under maintenance on 15 February. This will start at 17:00 (UTC) and last for about six hours. Some tools could have problems during or after this. [12]
Changes this week
- The TwoColConflict extension is a new way to solve edit conflicts. It makes it easier to copy and paste the relevant text to the text field. It will come to Meta and German Wikipedia this week. It is already available on MediaWiki.org. It will come to more wikis later. [13]
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 14 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 15 February. It will be on all wikis from 16 February (calendar).
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 14 February at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- Page Previews will be turned on for logged-out users on the Catalan, Greek, Russian, and Italian Wikipedias in the middle of February. Page Previews shows readers a short part of a linked article when they rest their mouse pointer on the link. This is to help them understand what it is about without leaving the article they are reading. Page Previews used to be called Hovercards. It will come to more wikis later this spring. [14]
- The Developer Wishlist is a list where developers prioritize tools they need. The voting closes at 14 February 23:59 (UTC). This process is only for developers.
Review
- You can read the 2016 product summary from the Wikimedia Foundation Product group to see what they did with things they said they would work on in the annual plan.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
18:06, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
New Page Review -Newsletter No.2
- A HUGE backlog
We now have 816 New Page Reviewers!
Most of us requested the user right at PERM, expressing a wish to be able to do something about the huge backlog, but the chart on the right does not demonstrate any changes to the pre-user-right levels of October.
The backlog is still steadily growing at a rate of 150 a day or 4,650 a month. Only 20 reviews a day by each reviewer over the next few days would bring the backlog down to a managable level and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
It didn't work in time to relax for the Xmas/New Year holidays. Let's see if we can achieve our goal before Easter, otherwise by Thanksgiving it will be closer to 70,000.
- Second set of eyes
Remember that we are the only guardians of quality of new articles, we alone have to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged by non-Reviewer patrollers and that new authors are not being bitten.
- Abuse
This is even more important and extra vigilance is required considering Orangemoody, and
- this very recent case of paid advertising by a Reviewer resulting in a community ban.
- this case in January of paid advertising by a Reviewer, also resulting in a community ban.
- This Reviewer is indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry.
Coordinator election
Kudpung is stepping down after 6 years as unofficial coordinator of New Page Patrolling/Reviewing. There is enough work for two people and two coords are now required. Nominations are now open. Details are at NPR Coordinators; nominate someone or nominate yourself.
Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Latest news from the Wikimedia Collaboration team, about Notifications, Flow and Edit Review Improvements. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you.
What's new?
Flow satisfaction survey’s results are available. The survey provides useful data on what users like and don't like about Flow. This information will be helpful in discussions recently begun as part of the editing team's Annual Plan process. As the editing team investigates its priorities for next fiscal year (which begins in July), many ideas for improvements have been suggested, including projects to research the future of wiki discussions and to fix Flow's shortcomings.
Edit Review Improvements [More information • Help pages]
- Huggle users are asked to share their feedback concerning proposed improvements for Huggle.
Notifications [More information • Help pages]
Flow notifications category in the Notification Preferences page will be changed from (in English) "Flow" to "Flow Discussion". Messages that have to be updated on TranslateWiki are echo-category-title-flow-discussion and echo-pref-tooltip-flow-discussion. [15]- Mentions were not recognized when more than one section is added during the same edit or when an new section was added and a change (new message or deletion) was done in another section. This is now solved. [16]
Flow [More information • Help pages]
- Rich text mode is now the default in Flow replies. Some inconsistencies used to exist. Now the preference between visual mode and wikitext mode is updated when a content change is made in the selected editor, literally when it is typed in, not when it is saved or when the editor is switched. [17]
- We plan to change Flow's URLs to make them more human readable. Your feedback is still welcome, the conversation will be closed on February 28th.
Collaboration team's newsletter prepared by the Collaboration team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
09:40, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:2017 Melbourne car attack
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2017 Melbourne car attack. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Review of initial updates on Wikimedia movement strategy process
Note: Apologies for cross-posting and sending in English. Message is available for translation on Meta-Wiki.
The Wikimedia movement is beginning a movement-wide strategy discussion, a process which will run throughout 2017. For 15 years, Wikimedians have worked together to build the largest free knowledge resource in human history. During this time, we've grown from a small group of editors to a diverse network of editors, developers, affiliates, readers, donors, and partners. Today, we are more than a group of websites. We are a movement rooted in values and a powerful vision: all knowledge for all people. As a movement, we have an opportunity to decide where we go from here.
This movement strategy discussion will focus on the future of our movement: where we want to go together, and what we want to achieve. We hope to design an inclusive process that makes space for everyone: editors, community leaders, affiliates, developers, readers, donors, technology platforms, institutional partners, and people we have yet to reach. There will be multiple ways to participate including on-wiki, in private spaces, and in-person meetings. You are warmly invited to join and make your voice heard.
The immediate goal is to have a strategic direction by Wikimania 2017 to help frame a discussion on how we work together toward that strategic direction.
Regular updates are being sent to the Wikimedia-l mailing list, and posted on Meta-Wiki. Beginning with this message, monthly reviews of these updates will be sent to this page as well. Sign up to receive future announcements and monthly highlights of strategy updates on your user talk page.
Here is a review of the updates that have been sent so far:
- Update 1 on Wikimedia movement strategy process (15 December 2016)
- Introduction to process and information about budget spending resolution to support it
- Update 2 on Wikimedia movement strategy process (23 December 2016)
- Start of search for Lead Architect for movement strategy process
- Update 3 on Wikimedia movement strategy process (8 January 2017)
- Plans for strategy sessions at upcoming Wikimedia Conference 2017
- Update 4 on Wikimedia movement strategy process (11 January 2017)
- Introduction of williamsworks
- Update 5 on Wikimedia movement strategy process (2 February 2017)
- The core movement strategy team, team tracks being developed, introduction of the Community Process Steering Committee, discussions at WikiIndaba conference 2017 and the Wikimedia movement affiliates executive directors gathering in Switzerland
- Update 6 on Wikimedia movement strategy process (10 February 2017)
- Tracks A & B process prototypes and providing feedback, updates on development of all four Tracks
More information about the movement strategy is available on the Meta-Wiki 2017 Wikimedia movement strategy portal.
Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation, 20:23, 15 February 2017 (UTC) • Please help translate to other languages. • Get help
Hovercards
or "page previews" or whatever. Regarding this discussion, Wikipedians will notice when hovercards are enabled by default for unregistered users, and then there either will or won't be another RfC. Maybe we can deal with any ramifications then? - Dank (push to talk) 16:47, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
- Dank I think they very much want to avoid the situation you suggested... where they deploy then we have an RFC debating removal. There's still stress floating around from past bad experiences. The WMF has been trying to build a more cooperative process for the WMF-Community relationship. The Hovercards case is going well, they want to deploy it where it's welcome. To quote their plan The onboarding experience for the feature will depend on the consensus of each community on having Hovercards on by default or providing users with an onboarding experience during which they can reject the feature. I'm fairly certain that means they're planning to ask EnWiki again.
- Regarding your close, I was basically trying to serve as a translator for them. Part of the reason for past stress is that we often assume WMF staff "obviously" know everything about how wikis work. The reality is that only a rare few staff-members were community-members before being hired. The rest have been hired to write code, etc. They have either never edited or they made just a few edits to try it. New hires know zip, and even after years their knowledge of our side of things can be extremely distant and spotty. Most of them have never participated in an RFC, much less written one or evaluated one. We would never expect someone with a dozen edits to have a firm grasp of consensus, we would never expect them to have expertise in evaluating a consensus.
- Basically, I invited you to confirm that I was giving them reasonable advice on what your close meant.
- The "no consensus" close was, for practical purposes, a consensus against. The "No consensus" language was basically a friendly WP:CCC invitation to reopen the discussion.
- I tried to offer an experienced evaluation of what that consensus meant regarding logged out users. My read is that a proposal for logged out users would go better, but that it would have a low chance of success. It would probably require some other factor helping to sway the !vote. Alsee (talk) 21:59, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
- If you ask everyone, maybe at WP:VPR, what they think consensus was then on this question and whether it might have changed by now, then we could probably tell from the answers whether another RfC is needed. - Dank (push to talk) 23:44, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Sirius
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sirius. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
New Page Review-Patrolling: Coordinator elections
Your last chance to nominate yourself or any New Page Reviewer, See Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Coordination. Elections begin Monday 20 February 23:59 UTC. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- The edit summary box is now a little bit bigger. This is to make it follow the Wikimedia design guide. [18]
Changes this week
- Page Previews will be updated on 23 February. This fixes many bugs. Page Previews can be turned on as the Beta Feature called Hovercards. [19]
- There has been a problem where the CSS of gadgets has been loading twice. The Gadgets extension has two new options:
typeandpeers. Thetypeoption solves this problem. You can usepeersto create gadgets with more than one style module. Read more about type and peers. [20] - OAuth will handle blocked users in a more consistent way. [21]
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 21 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 22 February. It will be on all wikis from 23 February (calendar).
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 21 February at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
19:25, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
explanation of pillar three
Alsee, if you still have time to work with Loninappleton on Signals Through The Flames, can you explain to them how their original sandbox draft,[22] is probably not in their own words,[23] and thus does not adhere properly to WP:5P3? I can do it if you are otherwise occupied, but since you are already familiar to them (as well as already familiar with them), Alsee, I figured I would first ask if you minded doing the explaining. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 14:09, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
- Sure. Thanx for the links. Done,[24] and I'll followup on any questions/comments they have. Alsee (talk) 18:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
- P.S. I took a second look, and followed up with a standard report for any copied content to be deleted from the article history. Alsee (talk) 10:16, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
New Page Review - newsletter No.3
Voting for coordinators has now begun HERE and will continue through/to 23:59 UTC Monday 06 March. Please be sure to vote. Any registered, confirmed editor can vote. Nominations are now closed.
- Still a MASSIVE backlog
We now have 816 New Page Reviewers but despite numerous appeals for help, the backlog has NOT been significantly reduced.
If you asked for the New Page Reviewer right, please consider investing a bit of time - every little helps preventing spam and trash entering the mainspace and Google when the 'NO_INDEX' tags expire.
Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Robert Sungenis
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Robert Sungenis. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
RfC at Talk:Tony Blair
Hi, I was wondering whether you could close the RfC at Talk:Tony Blair#RfC on inclusion of Iraq in the first paragraph - I think there is a consensus but wanted to get your opinion as I saw you closed an RfC at SOHR recently. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 12:01, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Absolutelypuremilk, I haven't looked at that one yet, but unfortunately now there is little chance that I will. It's a bad idea to ask a specific person to preform a close. If someone doesn't like the close they could claim that the closer was biased, and that you specifically invited a closer you knew would close in your favor. I'm not saying you were trying to do that, I'm just saying that it's a bad idea. It it gives unhappy people a perceived problem to attack. It's better for me to simply take on random RFC's where I haven't been invited. Sorry.
- Oh... I just took a look at it. Its only been open for 5 days. While RFC's can be closed at any time, the expected default is 30 days. (And it sometimes takes significantly longer for it to get cleared off of the to-do list.) It looks to be heading to a pretty clear oppose, but it definitely doesn't warrant a 5-day WP:Snow close. If it were closed right now, the close could very well be invalidated as unreasonably and unjustifiably premature. Alsee (talk) 12:26, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, I will avoid doing this in the future. I didn't know about the expected 30 day thing, I will just have to wait for a bit longer I guess. 12:38, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Absolutelypuremilk (talk)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Problems
- On 22 February the wikipedia.org portal did not work for an hour. This was because of a problem with a JavaScript file. [25]
Changes this week
- You will be able to use
<chem>to write chemical formulas in the visual editor. Previously this only worked in the wikitext editor. [26] - The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 28 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 1 March. It will be on all wikis from 2 March (calendar).
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 28 February at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- You can soon upload 3D files to Commons. The file formats are AMF and STL. The plan is for this to work later this week but it could be later. [27]
- The name "Wikipedia" will be more obvious at the top of the page when you read Wikipedia in the mobile view. This is because many readers don't realize they are on Wikipedia. [28][29]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
19:55, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
California Green Archives
http://www.oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/c84b33pj/?query=California+Green+Archives
From Hank Chapot, owner of this page; At this point, I don't give a "F" what you people decide. This is the most complete collection of western Green Party archives and is now housed at the venerable Hoover Instituion Archives at Stanford University. This Wikipedia page is simply a guide to directing scholars and researchers to the collection. My collection is nearly nineteen feet of shelf space. But you wiki-nazi's don't seem to care. I guess you are trying to conserve electrons. Have at it...
Here is a finder's guide for your edification;
Collapsing many paragraphs of detailed information about California Green Archives
|
|---|
|
California Green Archives - 2.21.14 PREFACE Collecting for the California Green Archives began in 1989 and was formally established by the California Green Party in 2000. The archives exists to identify, collect, preserve and make available records of enduring value to green activists, scholars, writers, historians and journalists, and for the future. 1. Archives will hold any documentary materials relating to the founding and establishment of the Green Committees of Correspondence, the Green Party of California and the wider Green political movement in the USA and beyond. 2. Archives will seek special collections from individuals involved in the founding and early development of the American Green Movement. 3. Archives will survey available collections and contact current and former Green Party activists and campaigns. Transfers and acquisitions will be made in accordance with this written policy statement, supported by adequate resources and only when consistent with the mission of the archives. 4. will provide accessioning, preservation, description and management of the collection.
The California Green Archives were founded by Hank Chapot to collect and preserve documents from the early efforts to establish the Green Movement in California. As I was a member of the coordinating committee of the Green Party Organizing Committee in 1991, I volunteered to save paper documents and related ephemera. From that time I began to save everything I could as the Greens grew from the CoCs to the Green Party of California. As an Activist in the San Francisco Bay Area, I had access to traveling Greens from other States and Nations, and I was an early participant in the effort to establish a National Green Party through membership in the Green Politics Network and as an early proponent of the Confederation/Association of State Green Parties. Since its formal establishment in the year 2000, I have used two small grants from the Green Network and The GPCA. The collection includes papers from these important Green, Kent Smith, Charlene Spretnak, Daniel Moses Bob Brister, Susan King. There are no restrictions on accessing the materials except that they do not leave the premises, currently my home office in Oakland California.
the Green Committees of Correspondence was founded in 1984 by a few hundred American political and environmental activists motivated by the success of Die Grunen, the German Green Party. After a few years of meeting, publishing and corresponding, green activists chose to create a national membership organization called the Green Committees of Correspondence. And there followed the establishment of state green parties and finally, the national Green Party of the USA.
The collection is composed of numerous Series, beginning with foreign platforms, early debate, founding Documents, party and candidate literature, minutes of State party meetings, San Francisco and East Bay Green Parties, Green Politics Network, campaign signs, publications, video, audio and miscellaneous ephemera.
Archive Box #1 History project outline, in memorium, Petra Kelly memorial, Archives story. Receipts. First Planetary Green Meeting Rio, 5.31.92, Green Party of Canada 1&2, GP Aotearoa - New Zealand, GP England 1&2, GP Oxford UK, de Grona- Sweden, Groenlinks -Netherlands, Die Grunen, Die Grunen,/Budnis 90, Canberra 2000, International working group (IWG), Archives box 1.1 Greens in the European Parliament 1&2,, Green East-West Dialogue Europe, Russian GP, European federation of Green parties, Green China, Canamex conference SF 1991 Archive Box 1.2 Early Debate - Charlene Spretnak collection -Charlene Spretnak co-authored the book GREEN POLITICS with Fritjoff Capra, "Driving Mr. Nader", by Linda Martin of GPHI, GP Historical docs, miscellaneous platforms, manifestos, 1940's Pacifist Literature from the Pacifist Research Bureau, CPUSA, Labor Party usa, California platforms published, Archive Box #2 Candidate lit, flyers and handouts, Party literature, Archive Box #2.1, Candidate literature - D. Moses, M. Benjamin, M. Gonzales, R. Mirkirimi, P. Camejo, Audie Bock (1st Green in Ca Legislature), H. Chapot, Archive Box #3 Publication - SF/Bay Area newsletter Green Consensus - 1987-1999, established by the San Francisco CoC in 1987 evolved into the Bay Regional newsletter during the voter registration drive and eventually became the State party organ. Archives Box 3.1 correspondence
Archive box #5 Bumper stickers, oddities Archive box #6 publication - Green Letter - the Green Letter collective and Tides Foundation (4 folders), Green Focus(GPCA newsletter ) Green Focus State party newsletter Archive box #7 Early press releases -GPCA, GP Legal docs, Media Committee, GP press releases, Clippings 84- present 1,2&3, Archives Box #8 - Books Archives box #9 publications - Green Synthesis -published in California, Synthesis Regeneration published by Don Fitz in Kansas City 4,5,6,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20, 21,23, Greens Bulletin, Green Politics by G/gpusa Archives box #10 -Charlene Spretnak papers Archives box #11 - Kent Smith papers Archives box #12 newspaper and magazine clippings unsorted (mostly Nader) Flat Box 1- cassettes - radio, speeches, interviews, Petra Kelly Q&A, Nader acceptance speech 1996 Flat Box 2 - discs, floppies, outdated storage media Flat Box 3 - Green Party buttons
Records Box #1.1 GPCA state meetings Santa Cruz 8/91, Sacramento, 1/92, Oakland State meet 4-92, Santa Cruz St. Meet -8/91, , Fullerton 7/92, Sac 4/93, Santa Barbara7/93, SF 94, campaigns, San Diego 1/95 Berkeley 6/96, Santa Rosa 96,San Jose, 3/97, Green Party Lit, Steve Saint lit, Readings from S. Stryker Green Politics course at UC Berkeley -1991 172, Selected Bibliography 1992, California State meeting packets & minutes unsorted, agenda -1990 forward unsorted,
Records Box #4 Left Green Perspectives, Left Green Network, Institute for Social Ecology (Brister collection) V9.1, 9.2, 10.1, 11.2, 15.1,16.1, Summer 87, Autumn 1998,IPPN, Toler, FIJA, Progressive Alliance of Alameda Co. Proportional Representation, My Assembly campaigns 1994-96, Critical Mass, Redwood Justice, Common Ground Collective Malik Rahim, weird stuff, War 2002-3, other orgs. wealth primary, None of the Above, Record Box #5 videotapes Records Box #6 Danny Moses - unsorted Records Box #7 Susan King collection - unsorted |
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hank chapot (talk • contribs) 01:51, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Hank chapot. I understand this is frustrating. For what it's worth I'll try to explain why the article is being discussed for possible deletion, and what you might be able to do to prevent it. Wikipedia currently contains over five million articles on an endless range of topics. People have also tried to create articles on an almost endless range of other topics. If I write a page about my dead pet goldfish, that obviously doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. At some point it was necessary to come up with some definition for what topic gets an article, and what doesn't. Eventually everyone worked out a general standard. If a topic has received significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources, then it gets an encyclopedia article. We call this Notability. There are good reasons that people agreed on this standard, but that would be an entire topic in itself.
- If you can show that independent books, newspapers, magazines, news, journals, or other sources have written about California Green Archives, then that establishes Notability and the article will be kept.
- Note, this Notability rule means that we sometimes do keep articles on "really stupid" topics, and sometimes we don't keep articles on "important" topics. But trying to debate what topics were "important" enough for an article is an impossible unworkable mess. Some people think Wedding dress of Kate Middleton is a stupid thing to have an article about. Some people think Mewtwo is a stupid thing to have an article about. We can't (and don't) get into those subjective arguments. Our WP:Notability policy is our best attempt to have an objective and workable threshold for inclusion. It's not perfect, but we had to have something. It's what we use, and it most cases it gets things approximately right. If no one has ever heard of my dead goldfish, if no one has ever heard of California Green Archives, then they are not Notable. No one is going to come here looking for articles on them, no one can expect to find articles on them, and other editors are going to have a hard time providing proper (and eternal) support work for those articles. Alsee (talk) 16:02, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Voting system
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Voting system. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 3 March 2017 (UTC)