User talk:Daniel Mietchen: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Thomas Wright Sulcer
m (Text replacement - "transpersonal psychology" to "transpersonal psychology")
 
(279 intermediate revisions by 37 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Usertime-text|Daniel}}{{Template:Utc|+1}}
{{Usertime-text|Daniel}}{{Template:Utc|+2}}


=Notes to self=
''[[User:Daniel Mietchen/Notes to self|here]]''
=Talk space=


==Archives==
==Archives==
Line 10: Line 6:




== Bot request - jogging [[:Category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls]] ==
Daniel, please could you see my post on the forums at [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,3209.msg30024.html#msg30024 this link]. My experience in programming Bots is precisely zero, so I could use the opinion (and perhaps programming skills if you have the time) of someone with an interest in this area. --[[User:Chris Key|Chris Key]] 17:12, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
:I think
:;<code><nowiki>python add_text.py -cat:Pages_with_too_many_expensive_parser_function_calls -text:" " -summary:"Test edit:Category jog for [[:Category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls]]."</nowiki></code>
:will add a space at the end of each page in that category and should do the trick. 
:Can't test this right now, as I am [http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/npre.2010.4511.2 traveling], but getting the permission to run this script will take time anyway &mdash; can you arrange for that? Will try to do the test edits when I get a stable internet connection, but this won't be before tomorrow night. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:19, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
:: Thanks Daniel. I'll do what I can to get approval (pending successful test edits) by the time you have a stable connection. Safe travels. --[[User:Chris Key|Chris Key]] 19:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
:::We have permission from Dan Nessett to perform test edits on the test wiki only (not the live wiki). Once these are done we need to get further permission from Matt Innis. We must ensure that the bot only does a null edit, and then as long as me, you and Dan are satisfied I believe that Matt will give approval as he has already looked at the discussion ([http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,3209.msg30037.html#msg30037 see his comments]). --[[User:Chris Key|Chris Key]] 21:30, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
:::: I have made a Bot request. Please ensure that the summary of the bot reads is <code><nowiki>Category jog for [[:Category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls|Pages with too many expensive parser function calls]]. [[CZ:Bot status/ExpensiveParserJog/Feedback|Give feedback.]]</nowiki></code> --[[User:Chris Key|Chris Key]] 23:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::OK. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 17:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
== About our new Psychology Editor ==
Hi, Daniel:
John Calvin Moore joined us as a Psychology Editor yesterday and has already dipped his toes into the water by editing the [[Abnormal psychology]] article. As the only other active Psychology Editor that I am aware of, would you be so kind as to introduce yourself to him and perhaps assist him in learning the ropes about clusters, subpages and so forth? Regards, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 22:19, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
:Done. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:48, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::Hello Daniel, interesting stuff you have here on Schizophrenia. I know you are familiar with Harry Stack Sullivan. He made the distinction between Dementia Praecox (organic brain disease) and Schizophrenia, by stating that Schizophrenia was a product of maladaptive living or circunstances in the individuals life that causes the person to become Schizophrenic. I'll be using that concept within the Whitman article with the tumor. As to your suggestions about classrooms and students, I am not involved in anyway with that scenario, but if there is a project of mentoring or helping in some other way, please inform me and we'll work something out. Thanks for your attention! BTW, has your research correlated anything with GABA and Schizophrenia? [[User:John Calvin Moore|John Calvin Moore]] 02:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
:::Hi John, my research is focused on developing early diagnostic tests for [[schizophrenia]] (and other [[psychiatric disorder]]s, like [[Alzheimer's disease|Alzheimer's]]) by way of [[brain morphometry]]. I have no clinical experience with schizophrenia, but am fairly well acquainted with its literature, so that if you are interested in collaborating on some articles, schizophrenia could be a good start (incl. [[Harry Stack Sullivan|Sullivan]], albeit he is not very prominent on this side of the pond). I haven't touched [[GABA]] for more than a decade, and never really was into it. As for coursework, we'll see. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:55, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
==stray article parts==
Daniel, thanks for marking those "Article 1" article orphans for deletion.  I wasn't very successful using the Eduzendium templates, so I've just started creating the articles the standard way and then adding the Eduzendium line to them, and that seems to be working.  Hopefully, I won't create any more of these.[[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] 16:14, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
==Eduzendium header==
Hi Daniel, I followed your advice and finally understood the process for creating new Eduzendium articles.  It works, thank you!  Now a question.  Here's the header that goes onto each course page (for my course): [[CZ:Special_Topics_2010/EZnotice]] .  It is awfully long; is there any way that the text (especially that stuff near the bottom) could be shortened so that it occupies less real estate on the page?  I'm finding it a bit instrusive.  Could all this stuff:
<pre>
This article is currently being developed as part of an Eduzendium student
project in the framework of a course entitled Special Topics at University
of Pennsylvania. The course homepage can be found at CZ:Special_Topics_2010.
One of the goals of the course is to provide students with insider experience
in collaborative educational projects, and so you are warmly invited to join
in here, or to leave comments on the discussion page.
The anticipated date of course completion is 13 August 2010. One month after
that date, this notice shall be removed.
Besides, many other Citizendium articles welcome your collaboration!
</pre>
just be changed to this:
<pre>
This article is currently being developed as part of an Eduzendium student
project. The course homepage can be found at CZ:Special_Topics_2010
To provide students with experience in collaboration, you are warmly invited to
join in here, or to leave comments on the discussion page.
The anticipated date of course completion is 13 August 2010. One month after
that date, this notice shall be removed.
</pre>
It's OK if not but I thought I would ask.[[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] 10:24, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
:Done. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 18:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
==Food and Drug Administration > Catalogs >  Therapeutic Equivalence Code==
Pretty cool what you did to [[Food_and_Drug_Administration/Catalogs/Therapeutic_Equivalence_Code|Food and Drug Administration > Catalogs >  Therapeutic Equivalence Code]]. Do you have any suggestions on a better way to handle [[Preoperative_care/Beta-blocker_evidence_table|Preoperative care > Beta-blocker evidence table]] so that it shows on the subpages? - [[User:Robert Badgett|Robert Badgett]] 03:36, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
:Done. Used the same hammer ;-) --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 07:41, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
== Truth In Numbers ==
Thanks for your welcome! Have we met before?
I hope I can write some articles on Indonesian languages and literature here. I want to see whether this project is really different than Wikipedia. One of the few things that annoys me on English Wikipedia is the fact that it is based on consensus of general knowledge, not on the opinion of the experts. I have to admit that most of the time it is not relevant and it does not get into my way. However in couple of instances it quite annoying. Something which is said by a great number of people doesn't make it true. I was once involved in a silly discussion about the language of the motto on the coat of arms of Indonesia. It is actually in Old Javanese but someone, an American who taught English in Java thought it was in Sanskrit. Why? Because his sources, who were Indonesian laymen told him it was Sanskrit ...
However I will still edit Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects, especially in other languages.
The Truth In Numbers will be available in October. You will be able to download the film or to buy the DVD also by then. I am not quite sure whether it is avaible by now as streaming video. The finished movie is a bit different than the trailer, which is a bit of a pity, as it is not only edited by Nick Hill but also Scott Glossermann.
I just took a peek on ''Koguma Main Bola''. I have to say it is difficult for beginners! It uses complicated grammatical forms which can be avoided, but later on that :-)
As for the charter draft, I think it is okay. One of the things that I like is that original research is allowed.
Actually I have always wanted to take a look and join Citizendium but it never materialized. Too bad other alternatives to Wikipedia such as Conservapedia generates more traffic than Citizendium.
Cheers. [[User:Revo Arka Giri Soekatno|Revo Arka Giri Soekatno]] 06:54, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
:Thanks, Revi. We haven't met before but I am active on several platforms for young scientists (the German equivalent of PNN as well as Eurodoc and ways.org), and in the framework of the latter I once made plans to get scientists in the developing world to contribute to the Wikipedias in their local languages. My initial focus then was on Central Asian languages, but I also had a look at the Swahili and Bahasa indonesia editions, from where I knew your name. However, this turned out to be even more difficult than getting them to contribute to the larger Wikipedias. Not sure yet whether opening Citizendium up to original research will help with that. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 07:40, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
== Thanks ==
Thanks for your help copying over the charter comments. That was getting a little repetitive. --[[User:Chris Key|Chris Key]] 15:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
:Thanks for your list of topics related to popular music and to topics from my bio.  The current definition of popular music seems to me unhelpful, but my own perspective is a materialist one that probably won't satisfy a lot of scholars who prefer aesthetics sanitized from economics.  I'll have a draft up in a bit, but with school starting, this is not an ideal time for in-depth work.
:--[[User:Joseph Byrd|Joseph Byrd]] 15:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
::If time is scarce (and it usually is), then I like to work on [[CZ:Definitions|definitions]] and [[CZ:related Articles|Related Articles]], so as to weave a web of context, on the basis of which the articles can be grown. Let me know if problems arise. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:20, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
And thanks for catching my move gaffe on my User page and correcting it. [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 16:18, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
== Theory of multiple intelligences ==
This is well outside of my area of expertise, but you are listed as a psychology Editor so perhaps you'd be able to help. A new author is a little unsure as to what to do next, could you perhaps give him some guidance? [[Talk:Theory of multiple intelligences]]. Thanks. --[[User:Chris Key|Chris Key]] 05:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
:[http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Talk%3ATheory_of_multiple_intelligences&diff=100695142&oldid=100694939 Done]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:15, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
== Thanks! ==
Thanks for the suggestions! I anticipate they will be very helpful as I'm beginning to navigate this site, and I hope to help get some of those sites up to approved. Thank you, and I'm looking forward to much fruitful collaboration! [[User:Rachael Cantrell|Rachael Cantrell]] 13:05, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
==Delete==
Hello Daniel Mietchen. I'm new here. Could you please help me? I want to delete a userpage, what should I do? Is there a template? Thank you, [[User:Ed Jussen|Ed Jussen]] 21:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
:You cannot delete pages, but we have the {{tl|speedydelete}} template to [[:Category:Speedy Deletion Requests|request Constables to delete pages]]. They will not normally delete userpages, but will do subpages thereof on such requests. If you tell me what page you are after, I can put the template in there, so that you can see how to do this. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:41, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
::I think that what you probably want is to delete your [[User:Ed Jussen/Lifecycle]] page now that you have uploaded that new article into the namespace. I would suggest that next time you create a personal [[User:Ed Jussen/Sandbox]] . That sandbox subpage can be used over and over again many times. All you have to do then is to simply delete (erase)  the content of that page whenever you have finished a project and are ready to start another one. If you wish, I could create that sandbox for you ... just let me know. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 22:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
:::I placed the template. Thank you for your help. [[User:Ed Jussen|Ed Jussen]] 06:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
==Eduzendium==
Hi Dan, I've just been trying unsuccessfully to help Nancy after your comments. We're trying simply to set up a new course for this year on the same lines as last year; some of the articles we proposed last year were not used so we'd like to reinstate those as fresh options this year. I'm afraid I've stumbled over the mechanics, and don't know what's happened to the Eduzendium notice. Any help much appreciated! Thanks, [[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 15:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
:OK, I'll set things up then. Probably tomorrow. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Daniel, thanks for your help!!
[[User:Nancy Sabatier|Nancy Sabatier]] 15:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
:Hi Daniel, I'll have a go at the articles. Could you help me setting up the Eduzendium notice about unapproved articles? should it be on each article or on the course homepage only? Thanks again for your help. [[User:Nancy Sabatier|Nancy Sabatier]] 09:22, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
:: Thanks, I made quite a mess with this first article, hopefully the next ones will be better! [[User:Nancy Sabatier|Nancy Sabatier]] 12:02, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
== New Physics Editor [[User:David William Tolfree]] ==
Daniel, I am sure you will be interested in getting acquainted with our new Physics editor. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 20:14, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
== Thanks for the Dyscalculia edits ==
Thanks for the dyscalculia edits. I hope more people will add to the article. This is a little known learning disability that could use some face time. Thanks again![[User:Mary Ash|Mary Ash]] 20:01, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
:This is the first of your articles that hit an area of interest to me, so there may well be further interaction on the topic. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 00:10, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
== Chipping at psychology ==
Partially in response to [[John E. Mack]], I started transpersonal psychology.
Discovering that [[psychotherapy]] is an import, I split out [[psychoanalysis]] and humanistic psychology, with the WP commented out; I think I can completely rewrite at the level here and give us a fresh start.  Unfortunately, my mother's library -- she was a psychiatric social worker -- is packed away.
Oh well. I can always do a Topic Informant article on the nuances of the ceiling cracks over my analyst's couch. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 01:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
:Thanks for the note. Don't have any plans for these at the moment unless there is a fire to extinguish somewhere. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 01:26, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
::OK. Just wanted a Psychology Editor to know what I was doing, hopefully in a noncontroversial way. Apropos of fires, though, should I work on [[pyromania]]? [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 01:36, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
:::What about starting with [[fire]], [[candle]], [[fire extinguisher]], [[fire brigade]] for background? --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 01:41, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
::::You may be getting more than you expected with [[fire extinguisher]]. There is some material in [[9-11 Attack in New York]] about how not to do command and control for a high rise fire.
==Lost my picture==
Hello Daniel Mietchen. This picture Image:Lifetree.jpg miraculously disappeared. I really uploaded it[http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Image:Lifetree.jpg#filehistory|here] but it left me. Only the thumb stayed. Can you maybe see what's wrong? Thank you in advance. I did not keep the original ... [[User:Ed Jussen|Ed Jussen]] 21:49, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
:Hi Ed, and thanks for the note. We have had some problems with image files recently, and so far, all of them could be solved. I have [http://reid.citizendium.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=76 notified] the tech people of this case. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
::Thank you, I uploaded this illustration again and from now I'll save them all on my computer> [[User:Ed Jussen|Ed Jussen]] 08:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
:::Thanks. Yes, this seems to be the best way to do it. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 08:37, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
== I would appreciate your comments ==
Daniel, I have just written a new article and the title will be [[Smog]] when I upload it into the article namespace. It is currently in my sandbox at [[User:Milton Beychok/Sandbox]].
I know that you are probably not an expert on the subject. However, I would very much appreciate your review of it and giving me any comments, additions, deletions, typo corrections,  or revisions you care to offer on my sandbox talk page. I am fairly sure that there must be some parts which could be better written from the viewpoint of clarity and understanding.
Thanks in advance, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 02:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
:Hi Milt, wrong timing, but I will try after coming back from [[User:Daniel_Mietchen/Talks/COASP_2010/Start|this conference]]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:48, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
==Creating subpages==
Hello Daniel, I have begun to write articles but don't know how to create a "subpage" .The instructions for this are unclear to me. So could you help me with that please? The first article which will need  a subpage is [[Diglossia]]. Thanks! [[User:Stefan Olejniczak|Stefan Olejniczak]] 11:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


:Hi Stefan! Thanks for dropping by. I just set the subpages up via [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Special:Contributions&offset=2010-08-23+12%3A56%3A28%2B00&limit=5&target=Daniel+Mietchen&month=&year= these edits]. In doing so, I made one mistake that I also corrected in the process. Please take a look and let me know if something is not clear. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 13:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


::Hello Daniel. It looks OK, thanks. And could you do the same now for [[Monophthong]] please?  [[User:Stefan Olejniczak|Stefan Olejniczak]] 13:08, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


==Possible bug?==
:::Can you give it a try? Just start by clicking the "[show]" link and do whatever you think is appropriate. I will go after you and correct things if necessary. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 13:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Daniel, would you be able to take a look at this page here: [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Category:Dabdef_Subpages]. I don't know if its my browser or not but the defintions don't appear to be sorting alphabetically. They are all grouped under '0'. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 02:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
:Except for three that lack the subpages template which adds the category (and probably also the 0 somehow, though I could not yet figure out how). And within the "0" subcategory, they do not follow the alphabet either, hmmm... Anyway, standardizing disambiguations is certainly something for the wishlist. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


== a new member ==
:::Sorry, I clicked on " ...the "metadata template" and tried to fill in as it is told in the instructions, but it did not seem to work. So I think I will need more help with this. [[User:Stefan Olejniczak|Stefan Olejniczak]] 14:15, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


We have a new member ([[User:Karsten_Borgmann]]), who is apparently editor of a German wiki connected to Humboldt-University Berlin: http://www.docupedia.de/  I don't read German, but I'm wondering if it is a project we'd like to partner with in some capacity.  Could you look the site over and see what it's about?  Thanks much. --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 20:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
:::: You can use this link: [[Special:MetadataForm]] which gives you a form to fill in. (But following the Metadata link, filling in, saving it, creating talk page (with "subpages") and then using the links on the subpages template should also work.) --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 14:38, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
:Will do. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:25, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


== Why  do my website's 4000  visitors per week include visitors only from the CZ forums and none from CZ wiki? ==
:::::Hi Peter, thanks a lot! This should help. [[User:Stefan Olejniczak|Stefan Olejniczak]] 14:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


Daniel, I have had my own domain website for over 12 years now. It consistently gets about 4000 visitors a week, including about 150 per week from <nowiki>http://forum/citizendium.org</nowiki> ... but not a single one from <nowiki>http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/(any of the 100+ articles I've written)</nowiki> .
:::::: It is important to note that for best results you should use [[Special:MetadataForm]] before creating the article. --[[User:Chris Key|Chris Key]] 15:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


It makes me ask how many people actually read any of our articles? Is there any way to find that info? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 04:29, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
== What has happened to our Welcome page? ==


:No idea. I just went there from your user page. Can you see that? --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 10:28, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
The [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Citizendium Welcome page] has a big white space in the left column (of the two column set-up) and the New Draft of the Week in the right column goes on and on and on ... way beyond what is ever has done before this.


::Yes, I will be able to see that, but it will be next Sunday. My log report is a weekly one received each Sunday. Does CZ have any such log reports that tell us how many visitors we've had? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 15:41, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Is someone playing around with it? Looking at the History doesn't seem to explain what happened. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 09:01, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


== Please look at this forum thread ==
: The reason: Editing the article changed the "NDotW"-markup. I added markup. To me, this proves that the page should not be transcluded. Instead an edited excerpt should be used. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 12:25, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


Daniel, this thread might be worth bringing to the attention of the charter drafting committee. See [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,2968.0.html here] [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 02:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
::To me, this prove is not convincing &mdash; the transclusion has been in use for over a year and rarely caused problems of this kind. But perhaps we should use a template on the featured article or draft that indicates their being featured, and asks for special caution with the markup. In any case, we have a new featured draft now. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 12:39, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


== CZ:Buglist examples ==
== Does the new [[Volatility (chemistry)]] article relate to Biology or Physics?  ==


Hi Daniel. I noticed you changed the Image references in CZ:Buglist example1 and example2 to mediawiki links. The reason I presented them as http links is when a user uses cz-bugs (which is an email list), the mediawiki link syntax doesn't work. Since these are examples of how to report a bug or enhancement request using email, I think we should leave them as http links. However, I am open to arguments against this if you have some. [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 21:28, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Daniel, does the new article [[Volatility (chemistry)]] relate meaningfully to physics or biology? If you think so, I will add either Physics or Biology as categories in the Metadata template so that it can be considered for nomination by you or another physics or biology editor. My reason is that there are no active engineering or chemistry editors other than myself and I am not eligible to nominate it.


:OK, fixed. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:47, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
I sure wish we could coax Paul Wormer into returning. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 05:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


== German ==
:Volatility is very relevant to things like [[pheromone signalling]], so I added in Biology. Yes, getting Paul back in is a goal of mine too. But I guess we will have to do some clean-up first in how we handle expertise, especially in certain areas. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


Daniel, I translated a small piece by Clausius from German into English, could you please check it? See [[entropy (thermodynamics)]]. As you know neither language is my mother language. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 13:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
::As a follow-up about [[Volatility (chemistry) ]], would you now please consider nominating it for approval? Please let me know. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 16:04, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
:I put my version directly on the [[:Image:Text_entropy.png|image page]] but think the article may merit a shorter version. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 18:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


::Yes I had some doubts myself about the length of the inset. On the other hand, I have seen so many mistakes in the quotation and also because  Clausius thought of the name ''Verwandlungsinhalt'', that I thought it would be interesting to have it. Maybe just the translation is sufficient and a good compromise?--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 07:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
:::OK, I will take a closer look somewhen these days. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:10, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


:::That would be a possibility but I am generally in favour of showing excerpts from original sources, and ''Verwandlungsinhalt'' is certainly instructive. So I pasted the whole translation in for the time being. Let's take another look at this after a while, or ask others, and decide then. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 08:34, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
::::Thanks, I will wait to hear from you whenever. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 17:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
===Other kinds of volatility===
In computers, volatile memory loses its contents when power is applied; the contents of nonvolatile memory are persistent.


== German ==
Perhaps chemistry or perhaps military, the terms nonpersistent and persistent, when applied to chemical weapons, really mean more volatile (e.g., phosgene, sarin) or less volatile (e.g., mustards, VX). [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 20:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


Daniel, do you agree with this translation:
:Howard, I know about volatile memory in computers as well as volatile stocks, markets, etc. in the world of finance. Then there is volatile as a description of human behavior.  
M. Planck, ''Über irreversible Strahlungsvorgänge'' [On irreversible radiation events], Annalen der Physik, vol. '''1''', pp. 69–122 (1900)? --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 13:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
:I would go for "On irreversible radiation processes". --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
:: You may link to the original [http://bibliothek.bbaw.de/bibliothek-digital/digitalequellen/schriften/anzeige/index_html?band=10-sitz/1899-1&seite:int=454 source]. [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 17:02, 28 November 2009 (UTC)


:::I had a link to a scanned version in the Ann. d. Physik, but it was the wrong paper of Planck, so I changed it. Question: the two links give different spellings ''Über'' and ''Ueber'', is there a historical difference?--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 17:09, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
:That's why I named this article [[Volatility (chemistry)]] so as to disambiguate it from the many  other meanings of the word "volatile". I really think that volatility as a measure of persistence for poison gases is a military term rather than a chemistryl one. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 20:57, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


::::Both spellings were equally valid in his time, though now ''Über'' would prevail (at least as long as the umlaut is available to the typist). --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 00:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
::Added to disambiguation page. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 21:15, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


::::: In particular, "Ue" is sometimes used for the uppercase umlaut. In any case, I prefer using the spelling of the original source. [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 00:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
== More about [[Volatility (chemistry)]] ==


==Trials==
Daniel, as you suggested, I added a new section to the article that discusses ionic liquids and the ongoing research into how odors are used as social behavior signals by insects as well as by mammals. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 14:56, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
I removed it for now. As to being back, I hope. Still very busy but I want to contribute here more. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 12:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
:Thank you, Milt. I am still on the road but will get to it as soon as I can. It would be best for me to rework those passages directly, and I would prefer 3-editor approval here anyway. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
::What help is needed? Mind you, if one considers the perfumes worn by some people, sociology is probably in order to explain why they are not killed. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 20:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
:::I plan to rework the biological section and add a few words on intramolecular prerequisites for volatility. This would require a third editor for approval. I think we should stick to the chemistry here, not branch out. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:31, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
::::Hi, Daniel ... just a gentle reminder now that you are back. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 17:45, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:::::I hope to get to it over the weekend. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 17:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


== About [[Fahrenheit and Rankine temperatures]] ==
::::::Daniel, just a gentle reminder about your  "plan to rework the biological section and add a few words on intramolecular prerequisites for volatility" ... the article is still waiting. Thanks, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 23:56, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


Daniel, I note that you revised [[Fahrenheit and Rankine temperatures]] so as to move the section about conversions and comparisons to a catalog subpage of the [[Temperature]] article. I certainly agree that those two sections make a good subpage for the [[Temperature]] article. However, they were really some of the core content of the [[Fahrenheit and Rankine temperatures]] article and I think they should '''also''' remain in that article. After all, there is no harm in having that content in both places, is there? Accordingly, I am going to reinstate a copy of that content in the [[Fahrenheit and Rankine temperatures]] article. I hope that you have no objection to having it in both places.
:::::::I actually went through two papers on the matter that weekend, but took my notes on paper and haven't found the time & mood to put them in here. I also thought about structuring some related articles (e.g. [[pheromone]] or [[olfactometre]]), and I was looking for images on the matter. So I am confident it will happen, but can't tell you when. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 00:35, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


Also, in a brief scan of the [[Temperature]] article, I saw no place where readers are told that information about conversions was available in the catalog subpage ... and many newcomers to CZ probably will not think to look at the catalog subpage. Perhaps, you should add a sentence somewhere in the [[Temperature]] article pointing to the conversions in the catalog subpage ... or perhaps it would even better to change the subpage from "Catalog" to "Temperature conversions". What do you think? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 22:14, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
==Please see my roast turkey page comments==
The question was not to spell out the word centigrade but whether to spell out the word degrees, which I did, or to use the degree symbol. Your edits returned the article so that it is now written both ways.[[User:Mary Ash|Mary Ash]] 20:52, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


:I was hoping for feedback on this, since I think it is core content but currently not very consistently organized. So thanks for being so quick! My preference would be to have a separate article for each unit (i.e. also separate F & R), to have the conversions all in ''one'' place, possibly even a separate article (I set up several redirects). A subpage ""Temperature conversion", i.e. with a non-standard name would not be allowed by current rules and also cause the subpages template to choke. Of course, there should then be links to it from everywhere relevant (I started with that for several of the articles but was not done yet when I saw your comment). --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
== Sorry about that! ==


::I have split the [[Fahrenheit and Rankine temperatures]] article and moved the Catalog page to [[Temperature conversion]]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:51, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
I hate when people get my name wrong. I'll make sure that no-one spelled [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User%3AManaging_Editor&diff=100720666&oldid=100720584 your's wrong] before running the software.  [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 12:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
:As long as it's a wiki page I can edit, I don't mind. Please also check for [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User:Editorial_Council&diff=prev&oldid=100720675 this typo] and the erroneous listing I reported by email. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 13:42, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
::Got it (and did catch one). [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 14:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


== redirects ==
== Regarding lemma article, [[Thylakoid]] ==


Daniel, it is not necessary to redirect uppercase/lowercase versions: Go and Search find both. (And in links, the "correct" link is preferable.) [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 16:50, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Daniel, regarding your recently created lemma article, [[Thylakoid]]: I had already created an article entitled, [[Thylakoids]]. Probably should have named it in the singular.  Redirect from the lemma doesn't seem to work.


:Partial correction: As it seems, this is true only for titles with at most 3 words. Curiosu. [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 17:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Can I delete the lemma and move [[Thylakoids]] to [[Thylakoid]]?  Please advise. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 00:33, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


::Thanks for checking. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
:Okay, I fixed it.  [[Thylakoid]] now redirects to already existing [[Thylakoids]].  Probably should reverse order. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 02:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


== Element subpages ==
::I [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Thylakoid&diff=100725262&oldid=100725217 asked] the constabulary to reverse the redirect. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 07:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
{{Elem_Infobox
|background1=
|align=right
|elementColor=
|elName=Iron
|eltrnCfg=
|elgroup=
|elperiod=
|elblock=
|no1=
|no2=
|no3=
|no4=
|properties=
|compounds=
|uses=
|hazard=
}}
{{-}}
{{Elem_Infobox
|background1=
|align=right
|elementColor=
|elName=Calcium
|eltrnCfg=
|elgroup=
|elperiod=
|elblock=
|no1=
|no2=
|no3=
|no4=
|properties=
|compounds=
|uses=
|hazard=
}}


On a related note to the bot deleting all the elemental subpages we have to recall that the [[:Template:Elem_Infobox]] uses that information.  We can easily reconfigure this template and possibly transfer the information to another location (may be to the metadata) where it can be called on by templates such as this. Looking at the calcium one you can see how much information is being drawn from the elemental subpages. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 21:05, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
:::Not sure what "reverse the redirect" means, as no article with the singular exists, so I supplemented your request, for clarity, I hope: [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Thylakoid here]. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 01:30, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:I like the template but it suffers from not being used much, basically because most element articles remain yet to be written.My preferred location for this kind of information would be a Data namespace, e.g. [[Data:Calcium/Atomic number]]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
::I can definitely see the advantage of a data namespace.  This would be very useful for geography too. There is no reason why everything has to be on a different page though.  We could easily set up a switch, similar to the format used with the metadata, and have everything related to calcium in one place. Or everything related to the UK in one place. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 21:30, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
:::Yes, a single page with switches would be a good alternative, another one being [http://semantic-mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Properties_and_types properties and types in Semantic MediaWiki], if we were going to install that. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:37, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
::::I had not heard of properties or types.  Maybe I am dense but after reading that article I am still unsure as to how such information can be ''called on'' by other articles?  For example, if The Berlin article tags it as the Capital of Germany, ''i.e.'' <nowiki>[[capital of::Germany]]</nowiki>, how would we be able to use this information in another article? For example, could we write something along the lines of: 
::::<nowiki>[[Get::(capital of::Germany)]] has a population of [[Get::([[Get::(capital of::Germany)]] population) ]]</nowiki>. 


::::Obviously the mark up used here is hypothetical. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 21:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
== User page decision ==


:::::Not exactly sure about your Get functionality but <nowiki>[[Has capital::Berlin]]</nowiki>, if placed in the [[Germany]] article, would create the semantic association "Germany" "Has capital" "Berlin", and a page <nowiki>Property:Capital</nowiki> could then automatically be populated (similar to categories), such that it lists Berlin as the capital of Germany, along with all other capitals of country articles that have been semantically tagged this way. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Well done, Daniel, keep it up. [[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 21:50, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
:And I concur![[User:Mary Ash|Mary Ash]] 22:14, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


(unindent)
::Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:23, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
These subpages have previously been discussed with Milton: [[User talk:Milton Beychok#Property list|here]] and [[User talk:Milton Beychok#Properties|here]], and in this [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,2948.0.html forum thread]. [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 22:35, 12 December 2009 (UTC)


==Approval?==
Hi Daniel, can you take a look at [[Interspike interval histogram]] with a view to approval, if you feel competent? it's a short article but says as much as I think needs saying. I wrote it so can't act.[[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 13:47, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
:Upon first sight, I would think much of this would have to go to [[Interspike interval]] first. Will definitely chime in by the end of the week. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:04, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
::I commented at [[Talk:Interspike interval histogram]]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


== We have started our campaign for donations and we already have $372 ==


Hi Daniel,  
Daniel, I just wanted to let you know that we started our drive for donations a few hours ago and we already have $372. Regards, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 05:30, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
:Too late to be news - I already tested the button. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 05:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


A dialog you say?:-Could you help me out with a link?  I didn't see anything here: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Talk:Lithium here: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ_Talk:Chemistry_Workgroup or here: http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/board,32.0.html.  Where should I look?...--[[User:David Yamakuchi|David Yamakuchi]] 00:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
:: Daniel, it looks like you added the donate button (which I presume is the one that Chris created) and it sure is simpler than my manual instruction. Thanks very much!! The whole [[CZ: Donate]] article looks very professional now. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 07:43, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


Whoops! now I see it!--[[User:David Yamakuchi|David Yamakuchi]] 00:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
:::Daniel, do you think it might be helpful to add a sentence to [[CZ:Donate]] explaining that donors do not need to log into citizendium@hotmail.com nor do they need to register to create their own PayPal account. The Donate button may possibly confuse some donors and they may believe that they must create their own PayPal account. What do you think? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 08:18, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


::OK, I think I recall where this "discussion" left off:
::::Done. Can you start a stub on [[PayPal]]? I don't know them very well. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 08:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
::It seems to me I was in on _this_ one last here: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User_talk:David_Yamakuchi#Periodic_tables


::And then again here: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User_talk:David_Yamakuchi#.22Ethyl.22_Anecdotes
:::::Will do, but it may be quite some while. Much too busy with MC and donation drive at the moment. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 01:37, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
==War criminals and crimes==
The term war criminals and war crimes are accurate and factual. The Nazi war criminals were convicted for their war crimes by a war tribunal. All this is based on fact and documented. I'm not sure what the problem is when it comes to using these historically accurate terms. You can not re-write history to sanitize it. I hope I understood the problem correctly between the interested parties. Finally, page blanking is a no-no at some wikis. I don't know about here, but I would not do it myself. MHO [[User:Mary Ash|Mary Ash]] 16:23, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


:::So, let me see if I can sum up for you...succinctly...The reason the Isotopes template was left "broken" on the [[Lithium/Isotopes]] page was that it was the only known example of what seemed to be a bug in the template rendering logic on CZThe "test" _breaks_ when you substitute the template into the page as Caesar did. I wasn't actually continuing that work, just re-creating the only references to the debugging example...as I thought was clear here: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Talk:Lithium.
:It's a bit more nuanced in this case, as Hitler and Mengele, for example, never appeared before a court. Nevertheless, there is historical reason to use the term, in these specific cases, and at this specific time. This is some of the material I would have placed on the blanked and locked page.
:Martin is correct that something such as "alleged criminal" might be used today, but this is [[presentism]] as applied to [[historiography]]Direct quotes should never be redacted for reasons of political correctness, and I've been attempting to explain the usage of Mengele's time. I note, for example, that the four-power proceedings at Nuremberg was titled "trial of the major war criminals".  That trial also criminalized membership in the SS, and there is little question Mengele was an SS officer. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:38, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


:::BTW, it looks like we have had a similar erroneous deleting incident in the Plutonium subpages as well. Isn't it's a sad state of affairs when we need to spend our time removing the [[Plutonium]] rather than adding to the [[Platinum]] :-) Eh?--[[User:David Yamakuchi|David Yamakuchi]] 02:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
::Mary, I do not see why you posted this comment here on my talk page instead of any of the places concerned with the debate. Since you used "you" here without any further qualifiers, I assumed that you were addressing me and that what could otherwise (e.g. on one of the article talk pages) be rather neutral comments were in fact severe accusations. I have neither denied war crimes nor tried to re-write history, nor blanked a page, nor edited either of the disputed pages myself. What I ''did'' do is [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Managing_Editor/2010/2/References_to_war_criminals react to a request for clarification of the usage of these terms] and [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Talk:War_crime&oldid=100732835#Content_ruling_by_the_Managing_Editor rule that the blanked page be replaced by some meaningful text]. In light of David Finn's comments below, I am willing to consider this a simple misunderstanding. I apologize for my part in it, and I have revised my original comment accordingly. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:03, 19 November 2010 (UTC)


Hi Daniel,
:::Please be more careful with the terms you throw around, Daniel.


Just thought I'd post this:
:::Mary said:
::::''Finally, page blanking is a no-no at some wikis. I don't know about here, but I would not do it myself.''
:::She did '''not''' say that you blanked the page. She did not say that '''anyone''' blanked the page. She simply said that the page was blanked, which is a fact. How you interpreted that as an accusation that '''you''' blanked the page is not quite clear, but, to use your words, it seems that you did not ''understand the problem correctly'' when you replied that she was accusing you.


http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,3054.0.html
:::I would also note that Mary is using '''you''' in her initial comment to refer to the plural, although I realize this may have been too nuanced a use of English for some.
:::Nonetheless, your counter of having been falsely accused was ill-thought out. Please revise. [[User:David Finn|David Finn]] 08:20, 19 November 2010 (UTC)


here for you in case you were willing to relocate our discussion over there...--[[User:David Yamakuchi|David Yamakuchi]] 01:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
::::Thank you, David, for reading so attentively and for being frank. I have revised my comment. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:03, 19 November 2010 (UTC)


==Request==
:::::No problem. I am going to take a break now, and I apologise that this and my other posts have been slightly abrasive. I really want there to be a good environment that promotes editing so that I can do some, but I found out today that someone who I would consider to be a great influence on my Citizendium contributions is being debated on in a negative way and it rather upset me. Howard is our most prolific contributor and has always been willing to compromise and collaborate in my dealings with him. I have also noted his ongoing relationship with Mary Ash which, although initially rocky, did serve both them and Citizendium well. I appreciate you taking the time to re-read your words, and also notifying Mary of that. Cheers. [[User:David Finn|David Finn]] 09:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Daniel. Could you edit [[User:Ro Thorpe|my user page]] again, please. I don't know how to turn the pink bits blue & get the little boxes that you made before. Cheers - [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 01:57, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
:Done. No boxes for subsubpages like Catalogs, no blue without metadata. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:10, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


Right, thanks - [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 12:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
== Eduzendium article metadata pages ==


== translation ==
Thank you for your message on my User_talk page and for the new BEE 4640 home page on CZ. The metadata template task has me thoroughly confused. I followed the directions blindly and ended up with the following error message: < CZ:Cornell University 2010 BEE 4640 Bioseparation Processes


Daniel what do you think of my translation:
The ((subpages)) template is designed to be used within article clusters and their related pages.
It will not function on CZ pages.
Retrieved from "http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Cornell_University_2010_BEE_4640_Bioseparation_Processes/Metadata_template"
Category: Misplaced subpage"


''Ersetzung der Hypothese vom unmechanischen Zwang durch eine Forderung bezüglich des inneren Verhaltens jedes einzelnen Elektrons'' [Replacement of the hypothesis of non-mechanical constraint by a requirement regarding the internal behavior of every single electron] ? --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 15:36, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I have begun creating new articles as needed using the "create new article with subpages" worksheet, though they lack the template structure set up earlier in the process. [[CZ:Cornell_University_2010_BEE_4640_Bioseparation_Processes/Template_article]]
:Dit past goed, maar ''force'' in plaats van ''constraint'' zou nog beter zijn. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:17, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


== potential Dutch member ==
Three students want to write about aspects of [[chromatography]], expanding the existing stub article to include material on a) chromatographic methods (e.g. gas chromatography, HPLC, paper chromatography), b) adsorbent types (e.g. ion exchange, reverse phase, size exclusion) and c) chromatography theory (e.g. adsorption isotherms and column dynamics). Do you recommend that they work directly on the existing draft, or create new articles within the Eduzendium category, which the Editors can later merge as they see fit?


Hi, Daniel,
If you are too busy with the hosting/management issue to assist at the moment, please feel free to refer me to another editor.  Thank you.  [[User:Jean B. Hunter|Jean B. Hunter]] 03:13, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


Sorry about confusing the NL and Belgium -- I was drinking my morning coffee!  Now there's a prof at a NL university named Paul de Laat who has emailed saying that his *two* applications have never been attended to. As far as *I* can tell, we never received an application. Do you know anything about him?  Thanks! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 16:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
:Hi Jean, thanks for the feedback on the Eduzendium templates - there is certainly room for improvements, and they have not been integrated with [[Special:MetadataForm]], since the latter does not yet allow customized preloading of content. The way things are supposed to work is the following:
:No, but I see the problem is already solved. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
:#Go to the course homepage and add the titles of new articles, as shown [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=CZ:Cornell_University_2010_BEE_4640_Bioseparation_Processes&diff=prev&oldid=100732977 here], using [[dielectrophoresis]] as an example.
:#Follow the instructions displayed for Dielectrophoresis: Open [[Template:R_EZ/doc/How_to_start_your_articles|this page]] in a separate tab or window to help you guide through the process, then go back to the window with the course homepage and click the button for Dielectrophoresis and try to follow the guide (reloading the course homepage after each "save" step is required). If there is anything not clear, please drop me another note - we really want these templates to be useful and will get rid of them if they are not. I have fixed the formatting for [[electrophoresis]].


== Aha!  So it was Daniel... ==
:The error message you get about subpages is normal, since Eduzendium articles (and the course-specific templates) are in the CZ: [[CZ:Namespaces|namespace]], for which the {{tl|subpages}} template system was not designed. The articles to be created for the course, however, will all be in the main namespace, where the subpages template will function properly and set up the headers with links to the subpages.


... who should get the hug and kiss for archiving the WaT page!  Thanks!!  [[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 21:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
:As for [[chromatography]], merging is complicated and very few people on the wiki have the technical permission to do that. So I would suggest that the students either jump right into the existing article, preferably after having familiarized themselves with [[CZ:Article mechanics|basic formatting]].
:I'm not eligible for the thanks this time, but I guess Peter is. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
:--[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:49, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


== [[CZ:Bot status]] ==
::Mr. Mietchen, I began an article [[Crossflow membrane filtration]] without realizing there was a template already set up for our BEE 4640 course, called [[crossflow filtration]]. Professor Hunter suggested I seek your help in remedying the situation, as there is no need to have both. Can you point me in the correct direction? Thank you. [[User:Justin D. Finkle|Justin D. Finkle]] 19:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)


Daniel, I saw that you weren't happy with that table either, so I was trying some stuff. However, I'm stuck trying to get the text to align left on the template [[Template:BotReq2]].  What am I missing?  I'm still not totally finished and would appreciate any changes you feel are improvements! [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 18:52, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
:::Hi Justin,
:I took another look but the changes I have in mind would take too much time right now. Will have another look later. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
:::no need to call anyone Mr. here - we generally use first names instead, though you are probably right in treating your professor differently.
:::I moved your [[Crossflow Membrane Filtration]] to [[Crossflow membrane filtration]] to go conform with our [[CZ:Naming conventions]] and transferred the BEE 4640 formatting to it. I will ask Jean for his opinion on whether the final article title should be [[Crossflow filtration]] or [[Crossflow membrane filtration]]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:22, 17 December 2010 (UTC)


::No problem, I'll keep playing, too. I enjoy the tediousness of it all :) [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 21:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
::::Hi Daniel,
::::Let's keep it in its current form [[Crossflow membrane filtration]]. Thanks for your help. [[User:Jean B. Hunter|Jean B. Hunter]] 21:55, 17 December 2010 (UTC)


== Feedback page ==
:::::Thank you both for the help. [[User:Justin D. Finkle|Justin D. Finkle]] 23:56, 19 December 2010 (UTC)


Daniel, I do not want to interfere with the drafting committee.
== New Biology Editor ==
But this will not work:
: "Please do not change the phrasing of the Charter text herein — if something has been changed in the draft itself, please strike out the phrasing here and add the new one below."
because a change may change acceptance or disproval. When a change is made, comments have to be removed, too, I think. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 22:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


:Right. [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=CZ:Charter_drafting/Feedback&curid=100140588&diff=100626568&oldid=100626567 Changed]. Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:05, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
We have a new Biology editor named [[User:Dorian Q. Fuller|Dorian Q. Fuller]]. Perhaps you may wish to put a welcome message on his Talk page. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 16:47, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


== Friedrich-Wilhelm(s) Universität ==
== Emails & forum messages ==


Daniel, I see sometimes Friedrich-Wilhelm and sometimes Friedrich-Wilhelm'''s''' (see [http://www.sammlungen.hu-berlin.de/dokumente/251/]) for the name of the Berlin University  before the war (now Humboldt). (I don't mean the university in Bonn). Is this a genitive and is the "s" arbitrary, or is this a mistake?--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 09:31, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I was away for two days and now have more than a hundred of CZ messages in my inbox, and several hundreds of forum messages have been posted since I looked last. Will take a while to crawl through, and I will likely not respond to all that I normally would. If you think there is a post or message I should absolutely attend to, please give me a reminder here. If it absolutely has to remain private, then please send me a brief reminder message with "Citizendium reminder" in the subject line. Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:27, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


: It is "Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität" (from 1828)-- see the official site: [http://www.hu-berlin.de/ueberblick-en/history/huben_html HU-Berlin]. Therefore it is the genitive. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 10:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
== Free space ==


::Thanks, Peter. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I wonder if you would have an interest in contributing to the new article [[Free space (electromagnetism)]]?  [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 20:29, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
:Thanks for your note, John - I will see what I can do. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)


== bots ==
== ME request ==


Daniel, we need to put the link to the Feedback page in the edit summary of all bot edits. [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 20:34, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Please see [[Talk:Wikileaks]]. [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 19:45, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
:Good idea. Will often require some shorthands which redirect there, though &mdash; edit summaries have a character limit. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:16, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
:Thanks for your note. I am still on the road and won't be back to normal before Monday evening. The matter seems too complex to be resolved on the fly, so I think that locking the page just for the two discussants is the best for the time being, and I will get back to the matter as soon as I can. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 00:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)


== Ping ==
::Thanks for the response.  The article is currently unlocked to all as Sandy has volunteered to try a rewrite. I'll follow your advice if it should flare up again. [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 01:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Not sure how closely you're watching my talk page, just wanted to alert you that I replied over there. -[[User:Pete Forsyth|Pete Forsyth]] 00:02, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
:Thanks but it's on my watchlist. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:51, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


== Web archive ==
::: I see you've taken care of it already, thanks! I'll enforce your ruling. [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 01:21, 5 December 2010 (UTC)


Daniel, I saw that the external link subpage contains the advise to use "web archive". I tried that and see that an e-mail address is requested. Do I use my own or Citizendium's? --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 14:30, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
== Final reminder about [[:Volatility (chemistry)]] ==
:Your own - it won't be displayed. They just use it to send you the link once they're done processing the info you submitted. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


== Thanks ==
Hi, Daniel: I know you have been busy ... we all are.  But it was back in early October when I added the discussions that you asked to be included in the subject article ... and which you promised to re-work.
 
I promise that this is my last reminder. Happy Christmas! [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 21:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 
:Hm - sorry, Milt. I have moved it up my list again, but may need another reminder. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:14, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 
== Approvals help please ==
 
Hi Daniel
 
I'm requesting approval on [[Miniature Fox Terrier]], which has been sitting stable for a good long while, and which I can't approve as author, and [[Heterotaxis]].  Can you spare the time to lend a hand? [[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 00:29, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:Hi Aleta, I am afraid both articles are beyond the areas in which I can approve, but I will check them (had actually followed the drafting of Heterotaxis at the time) and see what I can do. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 12:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 
::None of our currently active biology editors really work in quite the right field for either of these articles.  Perhaps it is time to consider trying an experiment.  For a long while now, I have wondered whether we could convince a non-citizen with the appropriate expertise to review and approve one of our articles.  If the article is good enough and we make the process easy enough, we might attract a new member or establish a sort of consultant relationship.  Would someone like to make an announcement asking whether anyone has a friend who would be qualified to approve one of these articles? --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 15:51, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
==User Discussion Page and Warning Removal==
''The discussion in this section is incomplete, since [[User:Mary Ash|Mary]] has [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User_talk:Daniel_Mietchen&diff=next&oldid=100751862 removed] her initial contributions to it. Peter's [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User_talk:Daniel_Mietchen&curid=100050477&diff=100751857&oldid=100751834 second comment] (still present below) contains all there is to say about the matter.''
 
:Yes, the email said that you could clear your talk page, to which I did not object. Note that I commented on the archived thread. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 02:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
:::Mary, there appears to be a misunderstanding concerning your talk page.  Daniel left his remark on your archived talk page.  Anyone can do this.  Your talk page was not reverted by Daniel and no-one else has reverted his edit either.  I understand that when things are tense, misunderstandings can occur.  This only means that it is very important that everyone double check and reconsider before clicking the 'send' button. You should also consider giving people 24 hours to respond to your emails. [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 16:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
::::: Mary, the diff you cite does not show a revert but a comment added on your archived talk page, just as Daniel has indicated above. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 17:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
: Be reasonable, Mary! There is no reason at all for your indignation:
:* Nobody touched your user page
:* Talk pages are not taboo. There is nothing wrong with adding a comment to a section on an archived talk page. There is only one "threat": It may remain unnoticed.
:* Neither your talk page nor your archived talk pages were "reverted" or "rolled back".
:* If you read what Daniel wrote then you will see that he did not issue a second warning. On the contrary, he "deleted" the first one.
:* Doing so on an archived page is much more discreet than doing it on the current talk page. It shows that he accepts its removal from the talk page.
:* Daniel's comment was -- as his signature shows -- an official message by the ME. He is fully authorized to leave such messages.
:--[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 18:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
::On the advice of a esteemed CZ contributor I have removed all comments concerning this matter. I will be leaving an opinion piece on my user page instead. If I accidentally removed any other user comments I apologize in advance. My only intent was to remove my own comments. [[User:Mary Ash|Mary Ash]] 19:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
:::For all concerned I removed the talk page comments as advised by an esteemed Citizendium member. Let's be clear about that.[[User:Mary Ash|Mary Ash]] 22:58, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 
== My Smog Discussion Page Comments ==
Daniel I just posted this on the Smog talk page. Here's what I posted:
 
(unindent) First I did offer sources see:
        * EPA Region 9 Owens Valley
        * The Lake Project
        * The Federal Register
        * ABC Australia
        * Where vehicles are not the primary cause of PM10 pollution
        * A picture from the area
They all clearly state the importance of PM 10 air pollution and the man made causes thereof. The only part I was incorrect about was the percentages given by a forest ranger many years ago. As this is an informal discussion, and not sourcing an article, the inclusion of personal information as part of an informal discussion is professional and warranted. Also, I contacted a seasoned CZ contributor about this talk page discussion and was assured that my comments were '''professional''' on my part. I do believe lively discourse and intelligent discussion, even if the viewpoints differ, does much for '''collaboration'''. In fact, I was strongly '''supporting''' the writing of PM 10 by professionals far better informed than I am as I do believe this is an important issue that needs to be written about. I was sincerely trying to '''encourage''' and '''compliment''' those who could do the task. As to my professional credentials when writing about PM 10, I could give a brief non-technical overview as I was educated by the air pollution control board engineers, water board personnel and other environmental personnel during my two years of providing professional coverage of PM 10 and other air pollution matters during my years as an environmental journalist. I am well versed in air pollution and its effects thanks to the many professionals who kindly shared their expertise and time so I could write about these topics.[[User:Mary Ash|Mary Ash]] 03:11, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:Thanks for the notification. I will not reply there, since you missed my points completely, and this is evident to anyone who actually reads [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Talk%3ASmog&diff=100751665&oldid=100751587 my post there] with some attention to detail. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:30, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
::Nope. I did not miss your points but I do respectfully disagree with them. I made an attempt to compliment and discuss the authors concerned. I was hoping someone would write an article on PM 10 or add it to the smog article. It seems my comments were misunderstood as I originally commented on the man made events that caused significant and out of compliance PM 10 air pollution in the Owens Valley. Milt seemed to think I was writing about naturally occurring events and I was not. You can not compare naturally occurring PM 10 events to man made PM 10 events. The naturally occurring event will usually produce more PM 10 matter than the man made ones. I was using my personal experiences, and data, as a frame of reference as I do not have the background to comment otherwise. I'd offer the analogy of the old telephone party but that would be an American term and probably misunderstood. Suffice it to state I thoroughly understand the effects of PM 10 air pollution and non-compliance according to the local air quality control board, CARB, local water board officials and the EPA. They all thoroughly tutored me on the subject and I sold many a newspaper for a couple years covering this issue. Or a good journalist is a Jack (or Jill) of all trades but a master of none.[[User:Mary Ash|Mary Ash]] 22:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 
== New user [[User:Joel M. Williams|Joel M. Williams]] ==
 
Daniel, we have a new Chemistry editor. You may wish to post a welcome message on his Talk page. He is also a new physics author as well. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 03:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
:Thanks for the note, Milt. Done. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:43, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 
==OASPA==
Daniel, note 10, the link to [http://poynder.blogspot.com/2010/02/open-access-linked-to-alabama-shooting.html Poynder's blog] about the alabama shooting seems to be a dead link. [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 16:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 
:Just clicked on it in your post above, and it worked fine. Dunno what the problem was/ is. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 17:26, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 
== Financial Report as of March 15, 2011 ==
 
Please read our [[CZ:Donate|Financial Report as of March 15, 2001]] for complete details on our financial history and our current financial situation. If you have any questions, please ask them on [[CZ Talk:Donate]]. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 00:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
:Thanks for the notification, and for compiling the report in the first place! I had read it already, though. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 01:10, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 
== New Physics and Mathematics author ==
 
We have a new Physics author, Amin Yazdani, whom you might like to welcome to the project. He is a student at a university in Iran. [[User:Bruce M. Tindall|Bruce M. Tindall]] 14:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
:Thanks, Bruce. Done. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:22, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 
== Nobel Prize ==
 
Hi, Daniel, please take a look at the discussion page at http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Talk:Nobel_Prize -- Thanks! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 01:05, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 
== New Biology author ==
 
[[User:James Parker]] is a new Biology author, a student at Edinburgh interested in molecular genetics. [[User:Bruce M. Tindall|Bruce M. Tindall]] 17:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
:Thanks - I left him a note. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 
== European views about Libya ==


Hi Daniel.  Thanks for sorting out the Liverpool move. I think I understand where I went wrongAll the best. --[[User:John Leach|John Leach]] 14:08, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
[[Operation Odyssey Dawn]] is perhaps not the best place for all activity, but it's something I can keep updated. I am eager to get European views into it -- I know very little, for example, of the German positionImprovements in the article are welcome, as well as suggestion for reorganizing on a broader set of articles. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 10:23, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
:You're welcome. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
:The official German position is intentionally not a clear one, since there were elections last Sunday and there will be two more (in other Landers) this Sunday. Military interventions of any kind have very little support amongst German voters. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:16, 22 March 2011 (UTC)


==Would like to have your comments==
==periodic table==
As I was clicking through the periodic tables I noticed there was an improvement, if not fixed. Your recent edits must have been on the right track. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 16:13, 28 April 2011 (CDT)
:I think it is [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,3978.msg42036.html#msg42036 fixed now]. Good to see you back here! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:18, 28 April 2011 (CDT)
::I just checked some more and it is fixed.  Good job. Glad to be back.  I was just wading through some of the forum threads and the governance issues seems a little crazy. But nice to see many familiar faces working hard. I really must try and find more time for this. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 16:20, 28 April 2011 (CDT)


After discussion on the Talk page of [[Water]], I entered the Freezing point of water as "Not measurable" in response to the comments made by you and Paul Wormer. David Yamakuchi's subpage transclusion has now revised it to " 0 °C* " ... which has me at a loss. Please visit the [[Water]] Talk page and offer your comments. I really don't know what to do about this. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 05:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
:::Thanks a lot for fixing that template problem, Daniel. And , Chris, it is wonderful to have you back. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 16:30, 28 April 2011 (CDT)
:I'm not sure why but [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Water/Freezing_point&diff=100635010&oldid=100634965 Peter changed it back to 0˚C].  I just reverted it back to the last version that mentioned it is not measureable. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 06:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
::No time right now, but [http://www.pnas.org/content/99/25/15873.abstract this paper may be worth a look for details]. Will get back later. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 07:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


::: I do not know how this happened. I '''thought''' I only corrected some typos. (Template influence?) --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 12:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
==External Links for XML article==
Daniel, I see that you posted a link on the [[XML]] article, in External Links. I really don't think that this is an ideal external link.  If you're willing, I'll try to find some others, but remove that one.  That link (http://lemire.me/blog/archives/2010/11/17/you-probably-misunderstand-xml/) is a rant by someone who doesn't seem to have a very broad understanding of how XML is used in the world, and his rant is one of those political stances (i.e., the rant against SOAP-XML) that I don't think CZ ought to represent unless the controversy is to be represented in full.  Please let me know if it's OK to replace that link with some more general ones that would help someone get oriented more usefully about XML.[[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] 10:47, 1 May 2011 (CDT)


::::Is it possible the window had remained open in your browser from an earlier time? Another problem we had in the past was that the two server clocks were not synchronised, but in that cases it was only a few minutes difference. 13:11, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
:Hi Pat, if you think another link would be an improvement (and I agree that there should be many better ones), then that's what wikis are made for. Surely no need to ask me (a relative newbie in that area) - just go ahead! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:25, 1 May 2011 (CDT)


::::: A few minutes? This is the [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Water%2FFreezing_point&diff=100635010&oldid=100634954 diff] betweeb 5:59 (David) and 12:50 (me), but [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Water/Freezing_point&oldid=100634965 this] is in between at 06:13. This could not be an edit conflict. (At 6 I was asleep, and the computer turned off.) --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 15:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
::Speaking of XML, has anyone programmed an XML-to-MediaWiki converter?  PLoS journals provide for downloading XML versions of articles, some of which CZ could import and develop further.  [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 21:09, 1 May 2011 (CDT)
::::::That's what i mean by ''only a few minutes difference'', it did not seem likely in your caseAnd if your computer was off, that rules out the other possibility. Very strange. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 15:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
::::::: The only rational explanation is that I did not edit the most recent version but that before it. I don't remember it, but I must have arrived there from the page history. (Perhaps being confused and taking the (then) current page as the talk page -- with signed comments???) --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 15:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
::::::::That makes a lot of sense. The signed comments confused me and are inappropriate. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 16:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


== Spellings ==
:::I have explored this in quite some detail over the last few months. So the general answer is no, but almost (see [http://friendfeed.com/danielmietchen/8107ed57/looking-for-ways-to-convert-xml-into-mediawiki this discussion]), while a specific answer for some kind of XML (which deals with taxonomic treatments) is yes, as shown in [http://species-id.net/wiki/Sinocallipus_catba this article], and discussed more broadly [http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.90.1369 here]. However, discussing any application of that here at Citizendium is moot as long as [http://ec.citizendium.org/wiki/EC:PR-2010-013 PR-2010-013] is not amended, as discussed in the following section. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 13:58, 2 May 2011 (CDT)


Belated thanks for sorting out the colour - [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 18:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
== Re: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/PR-2010-013#Revised_phrasing_.285.29 ==


== Supercooled water ==
Daniel, as you know, five rephrasings of your original, now on http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/PR-2010-013#Revised_phrasing_.285.29.  Should you consolidate, submit as ''new'' proposal?  What can I do to help?  [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 21:04, 1 May 2011 (CDT)


Daniel, re the issue of the freezing point of water, I thought a section in [[Water]] on supercooled water would be cool. Milton suggested I approach you about starting one if interested and time permits. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 04:49, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
:It's probably time to submit it in some new form, yes. But for me, there are other important things to consider, e.g. [[CZ:Managing Editor/2010/008 - Modifications to the Charter|Modifications to the Charter]]. Will see how we can move forward on these fronts, and any help and suggestion is welcome. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:02, 2 May 2011 (CDT)
:I am actually working on a [http://ways.org/en/blogs/2010/feb/10/the_illustrated_anatomy_of_a_paper_and_how_it_may_look_like_on_a_wiki more intricate integration of research publications with encyclopedic content], and the [http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003826 paper] I chose to demonstrate the feasibility of this happens to be about [[cold hardiness]], to which [[supercooling]] is essential. So more on that them is bound to come in (depends also a bit on the future CZ policy with respect to original research), but it will take time, since my current research focus is on [[brain morphometry]] and related stuff&nbsp;&mdash; far off any supercooled water. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:57, 12 February 2010 (UTC)


== About [[Bar]] and [[Bar (disambiguation)]] ==
::What do you think of using some BMC Q&A paper to test the waters? For instance, [http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/9/20 Who is H. sapiens really, and how do we know?] could be used to beef up [[Homo sapiens]], [[Human evolution]], [[DNA]], [[DNA sequencing]] and some related articles. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:00, 2 May 2011 (CDT)


Daniel, don't you think that the [[Bar]] article now needs to be moved/renamed to [[Bar(location)]] or perhaps better yet [[Bar (establishment)]] ? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 22:21, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
:Yes, and thanks to Chris for fixing it. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 10:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


== New User ==
== Press page ==
Thank you for your welcome. If I can help you with anything German,  please ask (nothing too scientific, as I haven't got a clue there, I'm afraid.[[User:Ralf Heinritz|Ralf Heinritz]] 16:31, 28 February 2010 (UTC). Danke für Ihre Antwort. Ich werde sicher nichts von WP eins zu eins hierher kopieren, warum auch. Probleme bei WP sind meiner Meinung nach: zuviele triviale Artikel über Blödsinn; der Tonfall vieler Mitarbeiter (mit Ausnahmen natürlich); in der de WP der übertriebene Neostalinismus; admins, die Regeln ad-hominem anwenden. Viele Artikel sind wirklich schlecht, es gibt aber auch wirklich sehr gute, die mir aber oft viel zu lang sind (während z. B. Encycl. Britannica Artikel oft viel zu kurz sind). Ohne größenwahnsinnig zu sein, stelle ich mir ideale Artikel etwa doppelt so lang wie die üblichen Britannica stubs vor. Na ja, mal sehen (Ich werde versuchen, Dich/Sie in Ruhe arbeiten zu lassen und mich einzuarbeiten - Sie können das hier natürlich gerne löschen, ich wollte es aber gesagt haben). Ich denke, ich fange hier mit Lévi-Strauss an und versuche dann vielleicht über Franz Boas zu schreiben.[[User:Ralf Heinritz|Ralf Heinritz]] 09:56, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


== Friedrich-Wilhelm(s) Universität again ==
This http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Press appears as number 2 on a google search. Obviously, it needs you as a contact (and some other updating maybe. [[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 20:40, 2 May 2011 (CDT)


Daniel, I'm reading a biography of Fritz Haber (and will write about him). The biographer states that Haber got his PhD at the Friedrich Wilhelm University, i.e., the biographer does not use the genitive (no ending s) for the name. Should one not use a quote in English: Friedrich Wilhelm's University as the proper translation of Friedrich Wilhelms Universität?  And how about the hyphen? --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 18:30, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
:Yes. Thanks. Updated it a bit. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 06:28, 3 May 2011 (CDT)
:In which language are you reading it? Anyway, I think there are too few rules to make this case a clear one. For instance, one might also go for the English variant of the king's name, ending up with [[Frederick William University]], and [[University of Berlin]] was also commonly used in that period. I would go for [[Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität]], with redirects from all reasonable corners. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:54, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
::The book is an English translation of a book in German. I will mention the German name once and then use Berlin University.--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 06:05, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
:::Sounds fine. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 07:08, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
::::It seems to have been: Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, but will keep checking. Thank you, my old Meyer has Friedrich- Wilhelms  Universität, so Berlin University really is the best solution. [[User:Ralf Heinritz|Ralf Heinritz]] 10:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
:::::Thanks for checking, and yes, butting in is encouraged here, not just on [[onomastics]]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 10:06, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


== Your write-a-thon suggestion ==
== What do you think of [[Los Alamos National Laboratory]]? ==


When you suggest "Context" for this week's write-a-thon, do you mean finding "red links" in Related Articles pages and creating new articles for them, or am I misunderstanding the context of "context"? [[User:Bruce M. Tindall|Bruce M. Tindall]] 16:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Daniel, I think that [[Los Alamos National Laboratory]] is ready to be nominated for approval. Would you consider nominating it? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 06:00, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
:My understanding of it is to create or improve Related Articles subpages to topics for which ''some'' content already exists (and be this a stub or a definition), which may well include some colour changes from red to blue. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
::Please excuse me [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=CZ:Monthly_Write-a-Thon&curid=100070108&diff=100644478&oldid=100644477 putting words into your mouth].  Please edit or remove as necessary. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 17:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
:::I am fortunate enough not to have to type with my mouth, but I think that fits well otherwise. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 18:56, 2 March 2010 (UTC)


==quote templates==
:Hi Milt, I read most of it and concur that it is in a good state. However, I will not nominate it, as I do not have relevant expertise. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 02:47, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Daniel I was looking at {{tl|Quote}} and {{tl|Cquote}}.  They are both a disaster.  They bring over a ton of baggage from wikipedia.  The code is swollen due to their inability to compromise and it seems to have features that are never used as well as features that cannot be used. I'm wondering whether we should just recommend to go with <nowiki><blockquote></nowiki> for most occassion?  Or, at least rewrite those templates to serve our needs before they  proliferate here too much.  Specifically it is silly to have a third parameter that is not used.  It is also silly having the author and source as 4th and 5th parameter (should be 2nd and 3rd to be more intuitive). A second opinion would be good here, thanks. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 11:04, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


:I agree with your assessment. On a different note, I thought of ways to get templates more organized, perhaps by using {{tl|r}} (or some variant thereof, with definitions and Related Templates) may be a valid option (indeed, I am also considering this for other kinds of content, e.g. all the policy pages in CZ namespace), e.g.
== Criteria for becoming a Health Sciences Editor ==
{{r|Template:r||::}}
{{r|Welcome to Citizendium||::}}
{{r|CZ:Templates||::}}
:What do you think?
:--[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:07, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


That idea might work quite well. No harm in trying it out. As to the quotes, I seem to recall a thread that discussed the style of quotes quite extensively. I'll re-read that and then try and summarise where I think we ought to be in a new thread on the messageboard. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 15:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Dear Daniel,
I read the matter at http://ec.citizendium.org/wiki/EC:PR-2010-017/Healing_Arts_workgroup,
which states, "Healing Arts Editors that are currently licensed to practice their discipline shall be accepted as Health Sciences Editors".
May I ask you, as the CZ Managing Editor, how CZ verifies that a person is licensed - is it his/her Registration Certificate or his name being mentioned on his/her College web-site?&mdash;[[User:Ramanand Jhingade|Ramanand Jhingade]] 18:03, 16 June 2011 (UTC)


==[[SERP]] vs [[Search engine results page]]==
:I would assume this verification to be a task for the [[:Category:CZ Editorial Personnel Administrators|EPA]]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 02:53, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Daniel you want to switch it so the main article is "Search engine results page" (where the text goes) and SERP is the redirect? Just pointing out that the "hot" keyword is SERP not the four term version, but ultimately I don't know if it matters much. The whole idea as you know is to write articles with titles according to your "list of keywords driving traffic" (which are also highly read on WP) and SERP is one of them. I'm waiting to see if there's any bump in traffic here.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 13:16, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
:Yes, I think [[SERP]] should redirect to [[Search engine results page]] because full titles is the way pages are named here in general &mdash; it is sensible to keep an eye on SEO but we shouldn't let this dominate the way we structure content. TO see the uptake will probably take a few weeks (CZ is not yet spidered very often). --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:07, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


::Okay, thanks, I didn't know, I'll strive for full names from now on.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 23:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
== New Physics author named [[User:Jim Earl|Jim Earl]] ==


::Also, btw, by working on articles about SEO and link farms, and combining this info with my Wikipedia stuff, I'm getting some new ideas about how to possibly boost readership to CZ. (I've been using your list to target articles as you know, and bring them in, like Acai berry, SEO, etc.)--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 23:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Daniel: We have a new Physics author named [[User:Jim Earl|Jim Earl]]. Please visit his Talk page and leave him a welcome message. Regards, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 08:02, 29 June 2011 (UTC)


::One thing I tried was googling my name and your name. (I used quotes like "Tom Sulcer" and "Daniel Mietchen".) We both have somewhat unique names. What I noticed was that your CZ page comes up on the first Google SERP before mine. Why? I think it's because your name on the web has more links (plus you've been on CZ longer than me) to other websites. Plus I saw your "Google profile". I copied your example and did a Google profile, which is great because it lets people LINK to pages like the Citizendium user page. Long story short: what may help Citizendium boost readership is not only more internal links (and targeting "hot" articles that drive traffic like you listed), but, as much as possible, having well-trafficked sites (Google, Amazon, Wikipedia, Yahoo) link to as many Citizendium pages as possible, including user pages, article pages, etc. The more, the better. So, a tentative policy suggestion which I'm thinking about is: suggesting CZ contributors get a free "Google profile" page in which they list Citizendium as one of their links.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 23:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
== Funding for continuation of Citizendium ==


::Wondering what you think? Plus I'm working on an article about DVDs (do you want me to name the article "Digital versatile disc"?--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 23:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Daniel: Undoubtedly you have been thinking about ways to secure funding to continue CZ.  Can you give us any encouraging progress reports? As ME, you have charter authority to contact outside sources for relations with CZ.


:::1) I didn't find your CZ user page on Google and yes, [http://en.citizendium.org/robots.txt robots.txt] indeed prohibits it from being indexed. Interestingly, the policy of demanding everyone on the forums to link to their user page creates links to the user pages that search engines are allowed to index, since they are free to spider the forum. Not a coherent strategy in my view, and I said so in [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,2782.0.html this forum discussion].
Have you put heads together with Larry on this issue?


:::2) My user page appears because I have linked to it from several places.
Microsoft tried an Encyclopedia, then gave up.  Perhaps they would like to participate in CZ.  Funding-wise, partnering, making Encarta content available for updating, notifying their contributors about CZ.


:::3) Higher numbers of relevant links to CZ certainly help its page rank scores but I do not think we should make any attempt towards coordinated creation of Google profiles to link to CZ. It would be way better to legitimately link from blog posts to CZ pages providing background (I do this regularly on my blog). But I do not think many here do blog.
Microsoft needs a much bigger toehold in the academic world.


:::4) As far as I know, there is no officially recognized expansion of the three-letter name DVD, and WP just pointed me to a [http://www.dvddemystified.com/dvdfaq.html link] that supports this vague memory with loads of details it never had.
I know you have many other passions besides CZ.  How does CZ fit into your agenda?  How do you see CZ's medium-term future?


:::--[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:57, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Will you, as ME, speak to us on these issues?  [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 19:20, 6 August 2011 (UTC)


::::Thanks, Daniel. I read this after loading the DVD article, and I'll switch it around so the DVD is the main article. Plus, the Usenet forum had better info than WP, and I'll try to include that. Thanks for updating me about the robots.txt issues; I agree with your ideas about fixing them, let me know how I can support you. And if I blog, I'll put links back to CZ, good idea. I don't mind if the public sees my CZ userpage.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 04:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
:It is entirely possible that Daniel will have an insight into the financial situation, I would also be interested to know his thoughts on the matter.


== Did the change I made to test wiki work? ==
:As far as his having responsibility for relations outside of CZ, you will also know that Cherter specifies that while the ME should ''represent the Citizendium in its relations with external bodies'' it is the MC who shall ''make all the financial and legal decisions for the Citizendium''.


Daniel. Two days ago you reported a problem with bot access to the test wiki. I made a change about 1 hour later and asked if it fixed the problem, but you have not replied. Did it? (see http://reid.citizendium.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39) [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 22:32, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
:Since Larry is already part of the MC, and has indicated that he believes CZ shall not come to an untimely end due to finances alone, it might be more appropriate to ask the MC directly. Notwithstanding the fact that Daniel may well have been active on this issue, it is clearly one of responsibility for the MC, and Daniel would (I believe) only be representing the MCs wishes to outside authorities should he be discussing finances with them.
:Thanks for the reminder, Dan &mdash; I hadn't noticed your reply and not tried again since I filed the bug. Just did a test edit, and [http://test.citizendium.org/wiki?title=U.S._history&curid=100146956&diff=100642045&oldid=100635938 it works for the one test I did]. Thanks! I will now do bot testing mainly on the test wiki. And while we are at it, may I also ask about the current state of [http://reid.citizendium.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30 bug no. 30]? As I see it, no problems surfaced on the test wiki with the setting of n=20000, and that is vastly better than the current n=100 at the live wiki. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:06, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


:: Let me know what your testing of the error "TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: 'dict' and 'list'" turns up. This doesn't appear to be an API permissions problem, but perhaps I haven't correctly analyzed the issue. I asked Greg if he made the change on the live wiki for the random page criteria and asked him to do so if not. I'll let you know of any update on this that I receive. [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 00:23, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
:As to how CZ, or his role as ME, fits with Daniels agenda I of course have no clue. If your question was a personal one then excuse my intrusion - if your question was how his personal circumstances are affecting his role as ME then I think that a question best asked of all elected officials, for whom election carried some responsibility. I can assure you, however, that similar questions to Council members have found an unwelcome audience in the past.


:::OK, thanks. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 00:30, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
:You are correct that we have heard little about potential financial solutions, beyond paying for it ourselves. Really it is the MCs job to work out the finances, and while the outside world may need a go-between to explain the MCs position, here at CZ maybe we could all manage with just hearing what the MC are doing about it? Say, on the forum?


:::: Greg has changed the article random length criterion to 20,000 on the live wiki. [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 19:32, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
:And as far as CZs any-term future goes, the [[CZ:Statistics#Daily contributors|statistics page]] will give you an idea of what direction CZ is heading in. CZ has been accused of being a "vanity site", alternatively a "hobby site", where a handful of members pay to have a space they can publish in, but that no-one will ever visit, much less use for encyclopedic purposes. Reversing that trend is likely to not be a purely financial consideration. [[User:David Finn|David Finn]] 09:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
{{Image|Average CZ edits per day.PNG|right|250px|Page edits from [[CZ:Statistics|statistics page]] with superposed trend lines. Crisis points?}}
::The figure at right shows some very broad trends. I wonder whether anyone at CZ has made an analysis of what has happened? If the trendlines are accepted there are three epochs: (i) Initial epoch of increasing activity ending mid 2008. This period ended with some catastrophic event that seems to be very tightly associated with mid-2008. (ii) Second growth period ending late 2009. This period ended with another catastrophic event and a short period of equilibration following it. (iii) Third period of steady decline, projected to end CZ altogether by late 2011.
::What assessment has been made as to the origins and demise of the two golden ages and why has a third rebound not occurred? [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 14:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
:The graphs on the [[CZ:Statistics#Daily contributors|statistics page]] do not show discontinuities in number of editors, although there has been a slow decline from the values in 2007-2008. The discontinuities in activity appear to be more related to activity of these authors on CZ. They became suddenly disillusioned? The really active authors left, leaving behind those not so productive? [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 15:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)


::::: Cool, thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:59, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
::Data points?
::*[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz]] joined the project May 1, 2008.
::*[[User:Larry Sanger]] drastically curtailed activity after March 19 2009.
::[[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 16:30, 7 August 2011 (UTC)


== Delete Talk ==
::More points?
::*Charter drafting process begins October 2009.
::[[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 16:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)


Daniel, I think that it is neither necessary nor useful to add this to the new Category.
←(Out-dent)<br>
The template is used on pages whose talk page is to be deleted, and its purpose is to catch the link from the speedydelete list
John, thanks for following up on my query to Daniel re funding for CZ. I agree with the points you make.
which leads to the page instead of the talk page. Adding this to the list would only cause a second entry, this time for the page itself
and thus only confuse the situation. (If the page is also to be deleted then a second entry will appear).
--[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 22:06, 23 March 2010 (UTC)


:Thanks for keeping an eye on these matters! Some of the DeleteTalk requests have been sitting around for quite some time, so there may be some value in having one central place that Constables are expected to check on a regular basis, and I think [[:Category:Call for Constables]] is the most suitable of the currently three relevant categories. Anyway, we are still in the testing phase with this new arrangement, and if it does indeed lead to confusion, then there are a number of options to react, including reverting the changes I just made. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:20, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Re: "As far as his having responsibility for relations outside of CZ, you will also know that Cherter specifies that while the ME should represent the Citizendium in its relations with external bodies it is the MC who shall make all the financial and legal decisions for the Citizendium."


:: Ask Hayford! The template was created to help him. I would do whatever he prefers. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 22:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes. However, that doesn't mean that Daniel, in representing CZ in relating outside CZ, cannot explore funding opportunities in conjunction with exploring partnering in the broadest sense of the term. Certainly, the MC will make decisions in those matters, though the ME has additional discretionary powers/obligations that might bear on this issue.
:: Added: A separate Category page for "Delete talk" templates could be useful to check for templates that have been forgotten to remove. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 22:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)


:::He would prefer whatever is '''simplest'''! I don't really understand this green template that asks me to first go somewhere else and delete a talk page, then use the reverse arrow (not explained to me, I figured it out) to go back to the green box, then hit Edit and remove a line of text, then hit Save, then go somewhere else and do something.  What a kludge!  Have either of you heard of [[Rube Goldberg]] and [[Heath Robinson]]?  One was 'Merkin, the other Brit, and both exactly the same.  The two of them must have collaborated on this weird apparatus.  I tell you frankly: if there were other functioning Constables here to do some of this stuff, I would simply refuse to spend my time trying to figure all of this stuff out.  If it gets any more complicated, I'll just bug out.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 22:47, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Certainly, if I knew a 'philantropist', potential large CZ donor, I'd want to receive advice from the MC what they want for the next steps.  The MC might decide to investigate and set terms and render decisions, but they might not want to spoil any special relation I already have.
:::: Sorry, Hayford. I don't have a better idea how to solve the problem that the main page is listed instead of the talk page. A good solution needs serious changes in how CZ is organized, and this will need a lot of work ... and a working EC.
:::: What is simpler? I do not know what is simpler for you. Whatever you say.
:::: You need not go back to remove the template. You also can remove the line with the template first and then go to the talk page to delete it. The order does not matter. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 23:08, 23 March 2010 (UTC)


:::::I keep saying over and over, and apparently no one believes me, I will NOT remove a page unless there is an actual Speedy Delete Template on itIf there are three layers of pages within a single cluster to delete, then I want to see a Template on each and every one of them. I got tired of deleting pages and then being told that I wasn't supposed to delete *that* one.  No more.  Please.  I'm not a computer guru or a rocket scientist, I just want to understand what I'm doing. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 23:29, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Matt, I thought of starting a forum topic saluting CZ's most prolific content contributersWhat do you think? Perhaps a better way to highlight them, especially if that better way stimulated the less prolific to want to make the 'Dean's List', so to speak. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 19:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC) [sig added]


::::::As far as I know, labeling each page individually is what everyone does, the only problem being that talk pages are not displayed separately in the deletion category. Specifically to address this problem, the DeleteTalk template was created. For further discussion, please use [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,3095.msg27982.html#msg27982 the forum]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
:Anthony, I think that is ''exactly'' the kind of thing we need - especially if it included links to articles that have red links that need further developing ;-) [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 20:25, 7 August 2011 (UTC)


::::::: Nobody wants you to delete a page without template. We are just discussing how to make it as simple for you as possible. The reason: Daniel made a slight change, as you know, and we discuss if this change is an improvement. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 23:40, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
::I think this thread is something for the Forums, where I will respond as soon as I get a decent internet connection. As for the graph, I can't pinpoint what is behind the plunge in 2008 but the two other spikes are due to bot activity being stopped (September 2009) and briefly resumed (January 2010). --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)


==Religion and pseudoscience==
:::My reply is [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php?topic=4086.msg43820#msg43820 here]. As for opening up a thread to thank people, I don't think we need another forum thread, and the best way to thank people for their work on articles is generally to improve some of those articles. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 02:47, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
==Average edits==
{{Image|Average CZ edits per day.PNG|right|250px|Average edits}}
Daniel: A plausible explanation for the first discontinuity in this chart in 2008 is a sudden discontinuation of activity (for example the departure of a number of contributors), which removes a constant from the edit rate, causing an immediate downward step in Sept 2008. Casual observation in the science and math areas shows that there were indeed a number of withdrawals at this time. A departure naturally leads to a downward step, followed by a continuation of the same steady rise seen before that. The second drop, in 2009 may have the same cause,possibly augmented by a stop in bot activity, but the downward step is not followed by a continuation of the rise seen before the step, as expected from a step drop in activity.


I saw you revert [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Creationism&diff=prev&oldid=100652841 my deletion] at [[Creationism]]. I wonder if we are talking about the same thing?
And of course the steady subsequent decline is serious and unaccounted for. Without the brief bot resumption arresting this fall, causing a momentary flat plateau, the steady drop in editing activity would commence earlier, immediately after the second step drop. The onset of the present-day steady drop then would correlate with the event causing the second drop.  


If a religion, such as Hinduism, says that God has blue skin and loves cows, shall we call this idea "[[pseudoscience]]"? How about if a movie reviewer says that Avatar has an interesting plot?
The steady decline seems to suggest the drop in activity is an ongoing phenomenon, as removal of one or more contributors would cause only a step down in edits upon withdrawal, not a continuing drop. Apparently CZ is seeing a net steady loss of contributors as time progresses.


In general, where do we draw the line between calling something pseudoscience and simply recognizing that it's completely unrelated to science? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 01:49, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
I suspect the exodus in 2008 was not adequately addressed to find its causes, and a another, apparently more substantial crisis occurred in 2009, and is again being ignored. Whatever the underlying dissatisfaction, this time the impact is more serious. It undoubtedly is compounded by the financial situation, but I don't think that is everything. [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 15:46, 11 August 2011 (UTC)


:Pseudoscience, to me, is when [[scientific method|scientific]] evidence (be it theoretical or experimental) is challenged on non-scientific grounds. This seems to be the case with [[creationism]], which challenges [[radiometry|radiometric]] measurements of the [[age of the Earth]] with [[guesstimate]]s derived from [[ancient script]]s.
:I can't add much to what I already stated above - "I can't pinpoint what is behind the plunge in 2008 but the two other spikes are due to bot activity being stopped (September 2009) and briefly resumed (January 2010)" - except that (1) I think you underestimate the bot contributions to the 2009 and 2010 spikes, (2) the rising flank of the 2008 plunge had a bot component as well and (3) a number of prolific contributors left in 2008, or at least reduced their activity here, but having just joined in myself then, I am not sure of any specific event(s) that catalyzed the drop. To find out more, it's perhaps necessary to dig around the forums or email archives. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:51, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


:The generalization to all religious statements, or to all of theology, is yours &mdash; as long as there is no scientific evidence for the existence of God, it is probably fair to say that the scientific community will gladly leave the debate on whether God has a skin, and of what colour, to the religious community.
== Applied Consciousness Sciences ==


:--[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:55, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Daniel:  See [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User_talk:D._Matt_Innis#Article_deletion:_can_literally_any_article_survive_on_CZ_today.3F this discussion] that indicates Matt is awaiting some more definitive action from a psychology editor before taking any action in deleting [[Applied Consciousness Sciences]].  As indicated on the talk page [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Talk:Applied_Consciousness_Sciences#This_article_should_be_deleted here] and possibly [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Talk:Applied_Consciousness_Sciences#Is_this_article_totally_hopeless.3F here] there is reason to proceed. The [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Carlo_Monsanto author of this article] appears to have no great interest in responding to these remarks.  [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 21:57, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


::Okay, thanks for the clarification. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 23:57, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
:The main problem for me to place the deletion template is that there have been so many modifications to the Editor's role recently, and they are not easy to find (e.g. none of them are linked from the Charter), so I am not entirely sure what the exact procedure is. Will take another look. Pointers appreciated. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:05, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


==Idea for experiment==
== Old Banner Still showing ==
I'm wondering about whether the "subpages system" (related articles, definitions, bibliography on separate pages as you know) hurts CZ's web presence. But I'm wondering if there's a way to test this somehow. Like, if we use current articles there would be too much history and other random variables in there (length of time, last Google crawl, etc). But suppose we create two entirely fictitious articles -- like with nonsense names -- with the exact same number of letters; and say on the page that it's just a test (in case anybody else sees it). And we google the made-up article title names to make sure they're indeed obscure. Next, with one article we create a thicket based on subpages. With the second article, we create a thicket of feeder articles (perhaps with just a number after the title name; so if the article title is Xrjslfffs, then the feeder articles may be Xrjslfffs1 Xrjslfffs2 Xrjslfffs3 etc. We'd try as best we could to make both thickets equal, by creating at the same time. Then after a month, we do a PageRank analysis and see which one had a higher score. Wondering what you think? I'm curious as to what would result. If you think it's a good experiment do I have to get permission from anybody first b4 doing it? Or put some kind of message on the articles so they don't get fussed with (and no redirects or wikilinks to them allowed etc). --[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 12:14, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


:I do not think a Xrjslfffs series would be tolerated in the main namespace, and the experiment wouldn't make sense elsewhere. So you have to rethink if you wish to go that way. Good candidates, in my eyes, would be drugs or other things that come in different name variants. Definitely needs more thought before you start. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 12:47, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Daniel, for non-logged-in users the banner announcing the call for nominations and elections back in June 2011 is still showing. [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 16:14, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


::I have started [[Jelly bear research]] and [[Jelly-bear research]] on April 1 and set myself the date of May 5 to review the matter. So I suggest you do your experiment on them or related articles ([[Gummi bear]] and [[Gummy bear]] would be a suitable pair too, and certainly a legitimate topic) if you are still inclined to do so, and I am available for further comment. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 02:54, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
:Banners often seem to be out of date, and varying between pages. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 11:18, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


:::Great idea. I have no idea how the hyphen character (-) influences google crawlers, or whether they ignore it, so I'm wondering whether differences between [[Jelly bear research]] versus [[Jelly-bear research]] would be a result of the hyphen or would some crawls thinking they're identical (?). Or would it be better to compare: [[Jelly bear research]] versus [[Gummi bear research]] or are the terms too different? Wondering what your thinking is about this.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 12:06, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
::I had an occasional look at that over the last few days and didn't find any such wrong banners. But I know they do occur whenever we meddle with SiteNotice, and as far as I remember, this is due to caching. No idea about the deeper workings, though. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


::::Finding out about how the crawlers handle hyphens and composites is part of the preparation of the experiment. [http://bit.ly/bsjLBw "Waste water treatment"], [http://bit.ly/cYkHzr "Waste-water treatment"] and [http://bit.ly/cBNh6p "Wastewater treatment"] give an idea. Probably nothing wrong with including [[Gummi bear research]] or similar synonyms (the "research" part may easily be dropped if it's too difficult to write about, but [http://scholar.google.de/scholar?hl=en&q="gummy+bear" there are some scholarly references], and I am [http://ff.im/ixSdv trying to track down another one]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:31, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
== Draft approved which shouldn't be ==


:::::I'm wondering if the whole hyphen issue can be avoided, because it might be one more variable which influences the results; and rather than exploring how it affects crawlers, maybe it can be avoided entirely? (Or will it affect results anyway somehow?) But a bigger question I have is regarding articles wikilinking to the main articles -- for example, if [[Gummi bear research]] is the ''main'' article, and I need to come up with, say, 20 articles ''pointing to it'', then what names can I give them -- [[Gummi bear research in India]], [[Gummi bear research in the United States]], [[Gummi bear research in Austria]] etc with 17 more countries? Or will this skew the results. The idea is to have a matching second thicket that ''only'' is different in that the wikilinks happen on the "related articles" pages, not on the front page (or main article page like Wikipedia does). So the second thicket would be exactly the same, but instead of Gummi bear research, it would be [[Jelly bear research]] (main article) plus 20 "thicket" articles. They'd be launched roughly the same day (so time-of-launch wouldn't be a distorting factor hopefully). And then waiting a month and checking PageRank. Would this work? And would it be conclusive and persuasive?--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 20:20, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
[[Alcmaeon/Draft]]: This page has somehow has "approved" status, but it's a "draft" page and shouldn't be at the approved stage.  The [[Alcmaeon]] article is approved.  [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 21:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
:I just looked at it, Russell, and it looks OK to me -- just a draft article.... What am I missing? [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 23:49, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
::The top banner clearly states "post-approval draft version", which seems to be correct. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 00:17, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
:::So why don't other [[:Category:History_Approved|approved articles]] have approved draft pages?  [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 14:07, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
::::Now I see what you mean - it is not that this draft page is approved, but that it is the only draft page listed in that category. That surely is a mistake and should be fixed. Will check. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:19, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
:::::[http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template:Alcmaeon/Metadata&diff=prev&oldid=100790877 Fixed]. Thanks for the hint and for insisting. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


::::::The need to have something pointing to the test articles was what caused me to suggest that the [[jelly bear]] level may be more suited - shouldn't be too hard to find 20 useful topics to point there. One such pair certainly wouldn't be conclusive, but once we have one in place, it shouldn't be too hard to come up with others, and after about ten or 20 or so, a pattern will emerge. This is another reason why the topics should all be legitimate. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:09, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
== Infobox template for planets ==


:::::::If you can specify a test approach which will establish whether subpages confuse the crawlers, then let's do it. I don't think it has to be "conclusive" but rather "suggestive", but that as much as possible, we remove any extraneous variables, and focus the experiment on the effect of the subpage system on the PageRank of CZ articles. My continuing concern is that the requirement "all test articles must be legitimate" will distort the experiment. For example, I don't know whether "Jelly bear research" ranks higher than "Gummi bear research",  or whether there might be some kind of interaction between 10 or 20 feeder articles (which also have to be "legitimate") and either of these two topics. I'm concerned that differing legitimate topic titles on the 20 may have some other impact, or introduce other noise into the experiment. My sense is few, if any, people read Citizendium, and an obscure test topic (which is labeled as a "test" in case anybody bumps into it) won't hurt CZ's reputation, since even fewer people, if any, will bump into the test articles compared to "real" CZ articles, and if they do wander on to a test page, there will be a notice on the page that it's only a test. Further, the test articles would be removed in a month or so anyway after the experiment.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 13:17, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
It appears that the parameters which are shown in the Tables on the page for the planet [[Uranus (planet)|Uranus]] are the ones we should be using in the infobox for the planets. These are somewhat different than those for the dwarf planets so we can't use the same infobox for both. I have presented the parameters in two separate tables, but that procedure need not (should not?) be followed. Ideally, the infobox would tuck in just below the top image, or maybe the image could be the top-most element in the infobox. The only possible addition I could suggest for the parameters is the inclusion of the astronomical / astrological symbol.  


:::::::How about this as an experiment: two main articles for comparison would be these: [[Jelly bear research test1]] and [[Jelly bear research test2]]. For each main article, there would be 20 feeder articles which point to the main one. The 20 feeder articles would be something like this: [[Jelly bear research testONEa]], [[Jelly bear research testONEb]] ... (18 more). On each of these test articles there would be a wikilink on the main article page pointing to the article [[Jelly bear research test1]]. And these 20 feeder articles would have NO subpages, no definition pages, no metadata page. The second set's feeder articles would be: [[Jelly bear research testTWOa]] [[Jelly bear research testTWOb]] etc (18 more). And these 20 articles would have subpages with the "related articles" page having a wikilink to the main article [[Jelly bear research test2]]. But there would be no wikilinks on the main article-space parts of the two articles pointing to the article [[Jelly bear research test2]]. The idea would be to compare two different approaches to inter-linking between articles -- direct wikilinks on the article-space (the Wikipedia way) with indirect wikilinks using the "R" template on subpages (the Citizendium way), and to try to remove any extraneous variables. Additional precautions include: monitoring all 42 articles for the "what links here" page -- to make sure that CZ contributors don't put links on other articles to any of the test pages, including the main ones as well as the feeder ones, and to encourage people (via the forums) not to talk about the test but rather ignore it.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 13:17, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Anyway, if you could devise the infobox, your help would be much appreciated. After it is ready, I will fill in the information and put them up on the articles for the respective planets.


:::::::And I'm wondering whether 20 feeder articles would be sufficient. It may take 50 or perhaps 100 articles to magnify any differences, but I realize this will take work (and add to deleting fuss after the experiment is over). What is your thinking about this? If you feel the requirement that "all articles must be legitimate" is too important, then I'm wondering what alternative experiment you might suggest that would still give us good results; it's hard for me to imagine what the 20 other article topics would be that wouldn't introduce more noise into the experiment.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 13:17, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
[[User:James F. Perry|James F. Perry]] 18:19, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


::::::::As long as all these test articles are legitimate, I see the experiment covered by [[CZ:Being Bold]]. If any of them is not, any Citizen can label it for deletion, which Constables will do. If you are uncomfortable with [[jelly bear research]] (which still smells of its April 1 origin), then we can think of another thicket. [[British and American English#Vocabulary]] gives a list of other possibilities, and anything that can be written with or without hyphen would qualify as well. Many [[chemical substance]]s (especially drugs) have multiple names, and so do [[biological species]]. The choice is your's &mdash; [[jelly bear research]] was just one suggestion, and certainly not the best possible one. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:05, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
:OK, will do. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 10:09, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


(outdent) Thanks for your thinking. I may keep thinking about this, but at the time I think I'll put it on the back burner, and work on other stuff. If the editorial committee begins to function and there is an urge to explore the issue of whether the subpage system confuses the crawlers, I'll be glad to help. Right now I'm working on articles related to [[Aeneid]] and seeing whether I can get web exposure.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 21:07, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
== Final draft Interview Correio Braziliense ==


:Sure, do whatever fits your interests better. But please keep in mind that using [[CZ:Subpages]] is the current standard. Also, please remember filling in the credit line for images you upload. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:13, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi Daniel:


::OK, thanks. I tried out the CZ:Start Article thing, but then I realized this makes the task of doing the metadata & related pages to others. So, I guess what I'll do is create the article and metadata page with the categories, and begin the talk page. When I get into the routine, it goes quickly. But the other pages I may or may not do depending on how much time I have. About the "credit line of the images" -- I have no idea how to do this. I thought I was filling in all the required fields. Are you talking about when I upload the image? Or, is it immediately after the image is uploaded, there's another step? Sorry if I've been doing it incorrectly.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 01:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
I made some further changes before I noticed you were cutting off further changes.
I hope they can be incorporated.


:::Yes, if you follow [[CZ:Start Article]], you can leave the metadata setup to others, and they will be able to find these pages. If you are comfortable with setting the metadata up, please do. The credit line can be filled in by clicking on the "Please click here to add the credit line" link on the page of any image for which it has not been filled in yet. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 01:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
[[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 18:04, 13 January 2012 (UTC)


== large delete ==
:No worries. Forwarded the latest edits too. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 03:33, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


Hi Daniel, you made a pretty big delete [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Biology/Draft&curid=100005642&diff=100658188&oldid=100658021&rcid=817999 here].  Don't forget to discuss it on the talk page. Thanks, [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 12:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
::Daniel: What is known about the point of this exercise for Correio? I think it was a good exercise for CZ in causing a bit of thought about the project. [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 18:42, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


:I'm fine with the changes. I thought it might help the article [[Panton Principles]] get more [[Google Juice]] but the higher principle is excellence in content.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 12:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
:::No response from their end yet, but the expected date of posting was somewhere around next week. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 10:43, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


::You were both faster than I could rework that passage, and I have commented, as usual, on the talk page. [[Google juice]], by the way, is a [http://bit.ly/cs8mPs common term] that might well deserve its own page here. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 12:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
== Update ==


:::Wrote [[Google Juice]] will put in redirects soon.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 12:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
You forgot to change where it says you're the Managing Editor. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 17:52, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 13:01, 26 June 2024

Hourglass drawing.svg Where Daniel lives it is approximately: 10:27


Archives



Bot request - jogging Category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls

Daniel, please could you see my post on the forums at this link. My experience in programming Bots is precisely zero, so I could use the opinion (and perhaps programming skills if you have the time) of someone with an interest in this area. --Chris Key 17:12, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I think
python add_text.py -cat:Pages_with_too_many_expensive_parser_function_calls -text:" " -summary:"Test edit:Category jog for [[:Category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls]]."
will add a space at the end of each page in that category and should do the trick.
Can't test this right now, as I am traveling, but getting the permission to run this script will take time anyway — can you arrange for that? Will try to do the test edits when I get a stable internet connection, but this won't be before tomorrow night. --Daniel Mietchen 19:19, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Daniel. I'll do what I can to get approval (pending successful test edits) by the time you have a stable connection. Safe travels. --Chris Key 19:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
We have permission from Dan Nessett to perform test edits on the test wiki only (not the live wiki). Once these are done we need to get further permission from Matt Innis. We must ensure that the bot only does a null edit, and then as long as me, you and Dan are satisfied I believe that Matt will give approval as he has already looked at the discussion (see his comments). --Chris Key 21:30, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
I have made a Bot request. Please ensure that the summary of the bot reads is Category jog for [[:Category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls|Pages with too many expensive parser function calls]]. [[CZ:Bot status/ExpensiveParserJog/Feedback|Give feedback.]] --Chris Key 23:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
OK. --Daniel Mietchen 17:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

About our new Psychology Editor

Hi, Daniel:

John Calvin Moore joined us as a Psychology Editor yesterday and has already dipped his toes into the water by editing the Abnormal psychology article. As the only other active Psychology Editor that I am aware of, would you be so kind as to introduce yourself to him and perhaps assist him in learning the ropes about clusters, subpages and so forth? Regards, Milton Beychok 22:19, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Done. --Daniel Mietchen 22:48, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello Daniel, interesting stuff you have here on Schizophrenia. I know you are familiar with Harry Stack Sullivan. He made the distinction between Dementia Praecox (organic brain disease) and Schizophrenia, by stating that Schizophrenia was a product of maladaptive living or circunstances in the individuals life that causes the person to become Schizophrenic. I'll be using that concept within the Whitman article with the tumor. As to your suggestions about classrooms and students, I am not involved in anyway with that scenario, but if there is a project of mentoring or helping in some other way, please inform me and we'll work something out. Thanks for your attention! BTW, has your research correlated anything with GABA and Schizophrenia? John Calvin Moore 02:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi John, my research is focused on developing early diagnostic tests for schizophrenia (and other psychiatric disorders, like Alzheimer's) by way of brain morphometry. I have no clinical experience with schizophrenia, but am fairly well acquainted with its literature, so that if you are interested in collaborating on some articles, schizophrenia could be a good start (incl. Sullivan, albeit he is not very prominent on this side of the pond). I haven't touched GABA for more than a decade, and never really was into it. As for coursework, we'll see. --Daniel Mietchen 19:55, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

stray article parts

Daniel, thanks for marking those "Article 1" article orphans for deletion. I wasn't very successful using the Eduzendium templates, so I've just started creating the articles the standard way and then adding the Eduzendium line to them, and that seems to be working. Hopefully, I won't create any more of these.Pat Palmer 16:14, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Eduzendium header

Hi Daniel, I followed your advice and finally understood the process for creating new Eduzendium articles. It works, thank you! Now a question. Here's the header that goes onto each course page (for my course): CZ:Special_Topics_2010/EZnotice . It is awfully long; is there any way that the text (especially that stuff near the bottom) could be shortened so that it occupies less real estate on the page? I'm finding it a bit instrusive. Could all this stuff:

This article is currently being developed as part of an Eduzendium student 
project in the framework of a course entitled Special Topics at University 
of Pennsylvania. The course homepage can be found at CZ:Special_Topics_2010. 

One of the goals of the course is to provide students with insider experience 
in collaborative educational projects, and so you are warmly invited to join 
in here, or to leave comments on the discussion page. 

The anticipated date of course completion is 13 August 2010. One month after 
that date, this notice shall be removed.

Besides, many other Citizendium articles welcome your collaboration!

just be changed to this:

This article is currently being developed as part of an Eduzendium student 
project. The course homepage can be found at CZ:Special_Topics_2010

To provide students with experience in collaboration, you are warmly invited to 
join in here, or to leave comments on the discussion page. 

The anticipated date of course completion is 13 August 2010. One month after 
that date, this notice shall be removed.

It's OK if not but I thought I would ask.Pat Palmer 10:24, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Done. --Daniel Mietchen 18:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Food and Drug Administration > Catalogs > Therapeutic Equivalence Code

Pretty cool what you did to Food and Drug Administration > Catalogs > Therapeutic Equivalence Code. Do you have any suggestions on a better way to handle Preoperative care > Beta-blocker evidence table so that it shows on the subpages? - Robert Badgett 03:36, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Done. Used the same hammer ;-) --Daniel Mietchen 07:41, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Truth In Numbers

Thanks for your welcome! Have we met before?

I hope I can write some articles on Indonesian languages and literature here. I want to see whether this project is really different than Wikipedia. One of the few things that annoys me on English Wikipedia is the fact that it is based on consensus of general knowledge, not on the opinion of the experts. I have to admit that most of the time it is not relevant and it does not get into my way. However in couple of instances it quite annoying. Something which is said by a great number of people doesn't make it true. I was once involved in a silly discussion about the language of the motto on the coat of arms of Indonesia. It is actually in Old Javanese but someone, an American who taught English in Java thought it was in Sanskrit. Why? Because his sources, who were Indonesian laymen told him it was Sanskrit ...

However I will still edit Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects, especially in other languages.

The Truth In Numbers will be available in October. You will be able to download the film or to buy the DVD also by then. I am not quite sure whether it is avaible by now as streaming video. The finished movie is a bit different than the trailer, which is a bit of a pity, as it is not only edited by Nick Hill but also Scott Glossermann.

I just took a peek on Koguma Main Bola. I have to say it is difficult for beginners! It uses complicated grammatical forms which can be avoided, but later on that :-)

As for the charter draft, I think it is okay. One of the things that I like is that original research is allowed.

Actually I have always wanted to take a look and join Citizendium but it never materialized. Too bad other alternatives to Wikipedia such as Conservapedia generates more traffic than Citizendium.

Cheers. Revo Arka Giri Soekatno 06:54, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Revi. We haven't met before but I am active on several platforms for young scientists (the German equivalent of PNN as well as Eurodoc and ways.org), and in the framework of the latter I once made plans to get scientists in the developing world to contribute to the Wikipedias in their local languages. My initial focus then was on Central Asian languages, but I also had a look at the Swahili and Bahasa indonesia editions, from where I knew your name. However, this turned out to be even more difficult than getting them to contribute to the larger Wikipedias. Not sure yet whether opening Citizendium up to original research will help with that. --Daniel Mietchen 07:40, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help copying over the charter comments. That was getting a little repetitive. --Chris Key 15:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your list of topics related to popular music and to topics from my bio. The current definition of popular music seems to me unhelpful, but my own perspective is a materialist one that probably won't satisfy a lot of scholars who prefer aesthetics sanitized from economics. I'll have a draft up in a bit, but with school starting, this is not an ideal time for in-depth work.
--Joseph Byrd 15:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
If time is scarce (and it usually is), then I like to work on definitions and Related Articles, so as to weave a web of context, on the basis of which the articles can be grown. Let me know if problems arise. --Daniel Mietchen 15:20, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

And thanks for catching my move gaffe on my User page and correcting it. Russell D. Jones 16:18, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Theory of multiple intelligences

This is well outside of my area of expertise, but you are listed as a psychology Editor so perhaps you'd be able to help. A new author is a little unsure as to what to do next, could you perhaps give him some guidance? Talk:Theory of multiple intelligences. Thanks. --Chris Key 05:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Done. --Daniel Mietchen 14:15, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the suggestions! I anticipate they will be very helpful as I'm beginning to navigate this site, and I hope to help get some of those sites up to approved. Thank you, and I'm looking forward to much fruitful collaboration! Rachael Cantrell 13:05, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Delete

Hello Daniel Mietchen. I'm new here. Could you please help me? I want to delete a userpage, what should I do? Is there a template? Thank you, Ed Jussen 21:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

You cannot delete pages, but we have the {{speedydelete}} template to request Constables to delete pages. They will not normally delete userpages, but will do subpages thereof on such requests. If you tell me what page you are after, I can put the template in there, so that you can see how to do this. --Daniel Mietchen 21:41, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I think that what you probably want is to delete your User:Ed Jussen/Lifecycle page now that you have uploaded that new article into the namespace. I would suggest that next time you create a personal User:Ed Jussen/Sandbox . That sandbox subpage can be used over and over again many times. All you have to do then is to simply delete (erase) the content of that page whenever you have finished a project and are ready to start another one. If you wish, I could create that sandbox for you ... just let me know. Milton Beychok 22:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I placed the template. Thank you for your help. Ed Jussen 06:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Eduzendium

Hi Dan, I've just been trying unsuccessfully to help Nancy after your comments. We're trying simply to set up a new course for this year on the same lines as last year; some of the articles we proposed last year were not used so we'd like to reinstate those as fresh options this year. I'm afraid I've stumbled over the mechanics, and don't know what's happened to the Eduzendium notice. Any help much appreciated! Thanks, Gareth Leng 15:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'll set things up then. Probably tomorrow. --Daniel Mietchen 15:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Daniel, thanks for your help!! Nancy Sabatier 15:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Daniel, I'll have a go at the articles. Could you help me setting up the Eduzendium notice about unapproved articles? should it be on each article or on the course homepage only? Thanks again for your help. Nancy Sabatier 09:22, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I made quite a mess with this first article, hopefully the next ones will be better! Nancy Sabatier 12:02, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

New Physics Editor User:David William Tolfree

Daniel, I am sure you will be interested in getting acquainted with our new Physics editor. Milton Beychok 20:14, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the Dyscalculia edits

Thanks for the dyscalculia edits. I hope more people will add to the article. This is a little known learning disability that could use some face time. Thanks again!Mary Ash 20:01, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

This is the first of your articles that hit an area of interest to me, so there may well be further interaction on the topic. --Daniel Mietchen 00:10, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Chipping at psychology

Partially in response to John E. Mack, I started transpersonal psychology.

Discovering that psychotherapy is an import, I split out psychoanalysis and humanistic psychology, with the WP commented out; I think I can completely rewrite at the level here and give us a fresh start. Unfortunately, my mother's library -- she was a psychiatric social worker -- is packed away.

Oh well. I can always do a Topic Informant article on the nuances of the ceiling cracks over my analyst's couch. Howard C. Berkowitz 01:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Don't have any plans for these at the moment unless there is a fire to extinguish somewhere. --Daniel Mietchen 01:26, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
OK. Just wanted a Psychology Editor to know what I was doing, hopefully in a noncontroversial way. Apropos of fires, though, should I work on pyromania? Howard C. Berkowitz 01:36, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
What about starting with fire, candle, fire extinguisher, fire brigade for background? --Daniel Mietchen 01:41, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
You may be getting more than you expected with fire extinguisher. There is some material in 9-11 Attack in New York about how not to do command and control for a high rise fire.

Lost my picture

Hello Daniel Mietchen. This picture Image:Lifetree.jpg miraculously disappeared. I really uploaded it[1] but it left me. Only the thumb stayed. Can you maybe see what's wrong? Thank you in advance. I did not keep the original ... Ed Jussen 21:49, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ed, and thanks for the note. We have had some problems with image files recently, and so far, all of them could be solved. I have notified the tech people of this case. --Daniel Mietchen 22:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, I uploaded this illustration again and from now I'll save them all on my computer> Ed Jussen 08:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Yes, this seems to be the best way to do it. --Daniel Mietchen 08:37, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I would appreciate your comments

Daniel, I have just written a new article and the title will be Smog when I upload it into the article namespace. It is currently in my sandbox at User:Milton Beychok/Sandbox.

I know that you are probably not an expert on the subject. However, I would very much appreciate your review of it and giving me any comments, additions, deletions, typo corrections, or revisions you care to offer on my sandbox talk page. I am fairly sure that there must be some parts which could be better written from the viewpoint of clarity and understanding.

Thanks in advance, Milton Beychok 02:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Milt, wrong timing, but I will try after coming back from this conference. --Daniel Mietchen 16:48, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Creating subpages

Hello Daniel, I have begun to write articles but don't know how to create a "subpage" .The instructions for this are unclear to me. So could you help me with that please? The first article which will need a subpage is Diglossia. Thanks! Stefan Olejniczak 11:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Stefan! Thanks for dropping by. I just set the subpages up via these edits. In doing so, I made one mistake that I also corrected in the process. Please take a look and let me know if something is not clear. --Daniel Mietchen 13:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Daniel. It looks OK, thanks. And could you do the same now for Monophthong please? Stefan Olejniczak 13:08, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Can you give it a try? Just start by clicking the "[show]" link and do whatever you think is appropriate. I will go after you and correct things if necessary. --Daniel Mietchen 13:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I clicked on " ...the "metadata template" and tried to fill in as it is told in the instructions, but it did not seem to work. So I think I will need more help with this. Stefan Olejniczak 14:15, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
You can use this link: Special:MetadataForm which gives you a form to fill in. (But following the Metadata link, filling in, saving it, creating talk page (with "subpages") and then using the links on the subpages template should also work.) --Peter Schmitt 14:38, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Peter, thanks a lot! This should help. Stefan Olejniczak 14:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
It is important to note that for best results you should use Special:MetadataForm before creating the article. --Chris Key 15:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

What has happened to our Welcome page?

The Welcome page has a big white space in the left column (of the two column set-up) and the New Draft of the Week in the right column goes on and on and on ... way beyond what is ever has done before this.

Is someone playing around with it? Looking at the History doesn't seem to explain what happened. Milton Beychok 09:01, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

The reason: Editing the article changed the "NDotW"-markup. I added markup. To me, this proves that the page should not be transcluded. Instead an edited excerpt should be used. --Peter Schmitt 12:25, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
To me, this prove is not convincing — the transclusion has been in use for over a year and rarely caused problems of this kind. But perhaps we should use a template on the featured article or draft that indicates their being featured, and asks for special caution with the markup. In any case, we have a new featured draft now. --Daniel Mietchen 12:39, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Does the new Volatility (chemistry) article relate to Biology or Physics?

Daniel, does the new article Volatility (chemistry) relate meaningfully to physics or biology? If you think so, I will add either Physics or Biology as categories in the Metadata template so that it can be considered for nomination by you or another physics or biology editor. My reason is that there are no active engineering or chemistry editors other than myself and I am not eligible to nominate it.

I sure wish we could coax Paul Wormer into returning. Milton Beychok 05:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Volatility is very relevant to things like pheromone signalling, so I added in Biology. Yes, getting Paul back in is a goal of mine too. But I guess we will have to do some clean-up first in how we handle expertise, especially in certain areas. --Daniel Mietchen 09:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
As a follow-up about Volatility (chemistry) , would you now please consider nominating it for approval? Please let me know. Milton Beychok 16:04, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
OK, I will take a closer look somewhen these days. --Daniel Mietchen 16:10, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I will wait to hear from you whenever. Milton Beychok 17:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Other kinds of volatility

In computers, volatile memory loses its contents when power is applied; the contents of nonvolatile memory are persistent.

Perhaps chemistry or perhaps military, the terms nonpersistent and persistent, when applied to chemical weapons, really mean more volatile (e.g., phosgene, sarin) or less volatile (e.g., mustards, VX). Howard C. Berkowitz 20:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Howard, I know about volatile memory in computers as well as volatile stocks, markets, etc. in the world of finance. Then there is volatile as a description of human behavior.
That's why I named this article Volatility (chemistry) so as to disambiguate it from the many other meanings of the word "volatile". I really think that volatility as a measure of persistence for poison gases is a military term rather than a chemistryl one. Milton Beychok 20:57, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Added to disambiguation page. Howard C. Berkowitz 21:15, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

More about Volatility (chemistry)

Daniel, as you suggested, I added a new section to the article that discusses ionic liquids and the ongoing research into how odors are used as social behavior signals by insects as well as by mammals. Milton Beychok 14:56, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Milt. I am still on the road but will get to it as soon as I can. It would be best for me to rework those passages directly, and I would prefer 3-editor approval here anyway. --Daniel Mietchen 20:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
What help is needed? Mind you, if one considers the perfumes worn by some people, sociology is probably in order to explain why they are not killed. Howard C. Berkowitz 20:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
I plan to rework the biological section and add a few words on intramolecular prerequisites for volatility. This would require a third editor for approval. I think we should stick to the chemistry here, not branch out. --Daniel Mietchen 20:31, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Daniel ... just a gentle reminder now that you are back. Milton Beychok 17:45, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
I hope to get to it over the weekend. --Daniel Mietchen 17:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Daniel, just a gentle reminder about your "plan to rework the biological section and add a few words on intramolecular prerequisites for volatility" ... the article is still waiting. Thanks, Milton Beychok 23:56, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I actually went through two papers on the matter that weekend, but took my notes on paper and haven't found the time & mood to put them in here. I also thought about structuring some related articles (e.g. pheromone or olfactometre), and I was looking for images on the matter. So I am confident it will happen, but can't tell you when. --Daniel Mietchen 00:35, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Please see my roast turkey page comments

The question was not to spell out the word centigrade but whether to spell out the word degrees, which I did, or to use the degree symbol. Your edits returned the article so that it is now written both ways.Mary Ash 20:52, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that!

I hate when people get my name wrong. I'll make sure that no-one spelled your's wrong before running the software. D. Matt Innis 12:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

As long as it's a wiki page I can edit, I don't mind. Please also check for this typo and the erroneous listing I reported by email. --Daniel Mietchen 13:42, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Got it (and did catch one). D. Matt Innis 14:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Regarding lemma article, Thylakoid

Daniel, regarding your recently created lemma article, Thylakoid: I had already created an article entitled, Thylakoids. Probably should have named it in the singular. Redirect from the lemma doesn't seem to work.

Can I delete the lemma and move Thylakoids to Thylakoid? Please advise. Anthony.Sebastian 00:33, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I fixed it. Thylakoid now redirects to already existing Thylakoids. Probably should reverse order. Anthony.Sebastian 02:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
I asked the constabulary to reverse the redirect. --Daniel Mietchen 07:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Not sure what "reverse the redirect" means, as no article with the singular exists, so I supplemented your request, for clarity, I hope: here. Anthony.Sebastian 01:30, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

User page decision

Well done, Daniel, keep it up. Aleta Curry 21:50, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

And I concur!Mary Ash 22:14, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 22:23, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Approval?

Hi Daniel, can you take a look at Interspike interval histogram with a view to approval, if you feel competent? it's a short article but says as much as I think needs saying. I wrote it so can't act.Gareth Leng 13:47, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Upon first sight, I would think much of this would have to go to Interspike interval first. Will definitely chime in by the end of the week. --Daniel Mietchen 15:04, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
I commented at Talk:Interspike interval histogram. --Daniel Mietchen 23:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

We have started our campaign for donations and we already have $372

Daniel, I just wanted to let you know that we started our drive for donations a few hours ago and we already have $372. Regards, Milton Beychok 05:30, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Too late to be news - I already tested the button. --Daniel Mietchen 05:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Daniel, it looks like you added the donate button (which I presume is the one that Chris created) and it sure is simpler than my manual instruction. Thanks very much!! The whole CZ: Donate article looks very professional now. Milton Beychok 07:43, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Daniel, do you think it might be helpful to add a sentence to CZ:Donate explaining that donors do not need to log into citizendium@hotmail.com nor do they need to register to create their own PayPal account. The Donate button may possibly confuse some donors and they may believe that they must create their own PayPal account. What do you think? Milton Beychok 08:18, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Done. Can you start a stub on PayPal? I don't know them very well. --Daniel Mietchen 08:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Will do, but it may be quite some while. Much too busy with MC and donation drive at the moment. Milton Beychok 01:37, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

War criminals and crimes

The term war criminals and war crimes are accurate and factual. The Nazi war criminals were convicted for their war crimes by a war tribunal. All this is based on fact and documented. I'm not sure what the problem is when it comes to using these historically accurate terms. You can not re-write history to sanitize it. I hope I understood the problem correctly between the interested parties. Finally, page blanking is a no-no at some wikis. I don't know about here, but I would not do it myself. MHO Mary Ash 16:23, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

It's a bit more nuanced in this case, as Hitler and Mengele, for example, never appeared before a court. Nevertheless, there is historical reason to use the term, in these specific cases, and at this specific time. This is some of the material I would have placed on the blanked and locked page.
Martin is correct that something such as "alleged criminal" might be used today, but this is presentism as applied to historiography. Direct quotes should never be redacted for reasons of political correctness, and I've been attempting to explain the usage of Mengele's time. I note, for example, that the four-power proceedings at Nuremberg was titled "trial of the major war criminals". That trial also criminalized membership in the SS, and there is little question Mengele was an SS officer. Howard C. Berkowitz 17:38, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Mary, I do not see why you posted this comment here on my talk page instead of any of the places concerned with the debate. Since you used "you" here without any further qualifiers, I assumed that you were addressing me and that what could otherwise (e.g. on one of the article talk pages) be rather neutral comments were in fact severe accusations. I have neither denied war crimes nor tried to re-write history, nor blanked a page, nor edited either of the disputed pages myself. What I did do is react to a request for clarification of the usage of these terms and rule that the blanked page be replaced by some meaningful text. In light of David Finn's comments below, I am willing to consider this a simple misunderstanding. I apologize for my part in it, and I have revised my original comment accordingly. --Daniel Mietchen 09:03, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Please be more careful with the terms you throw around, Daniel.
Mary said:
Finally, page blanking is a no-no at some wikis. I don't know about here, but I would not do it myself.
She did not say that you blanked the page. She did not say that anyone blanked the page. She simply said that the page was blanked, which is a fact. How you interpreted that as an accusation that you blanked the page is not quite clear, but, to use your words, it seems that you did not understand the problem correctly when you replied that she was accusing you.
I would also note that Mary is using you in her initial comment to refer to the plural, although I realize this may have been too nuanced a use of English for some.
Nonetheless, your counter of having been falsely accused was ill-thought out. Please revise. David Finn 08:20, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, David, for reading so attentively and for being frank. I have revised my comment. --Daniel Mietchen 09:03, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
No problem. I am going to take a break now, and I apologise that this and my other posts have been slightly abrasive. I really want there to be a good environment that promotes editing so that I can do some, but I found out today that someone who I would consider to be a great influence on my Citizendium contributions is being debated on in a negative way and it rather upset me. Howard is our most prolific contributor and has always been willing to compromise and collaborate in my dealings with him. I have also noted his ongoing relationship with Mary Ash which, although initially rocky, did serve both them and Citizendium well. I appreciate you taking the time to re-read your words, and also notifying Mary of that. Cheers. David Finn 09:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Eduzendium article metadata pages

Thank you for your message on my User_talk page and for the new BEE 4640 home page on CZ. The metadata template task has me thoroughly confused. I followed the directions blindly and ended up with the following error message: < CZ:Cornell University 2010 BEE 4640 Bioseparation Processes

The ((subpages)) template is designed to be used within article clusters and their related pages. It will not function on CZ pages. Retrieved from "http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Cornell_University_2010_BEE_4640_Bioseparation_Processes/Metadata_template" Category: Misplaced subpage"

I have begun creating new articles as needed using the "create new article with subpages" worksheet, though they lack the template structure set up earlier in the process. CZ:Cornell_University_2010_BEE_4640_Bioseparation_Processes/Template_article

Three students want to write about aspects of chromatography, expanding the existing stub article to include material on a) chromatographic methods (e.g. gas chromatography, HPLC, paper chromatography), b) adsorbent types (e.g. ion exchange, reverse phase, size exclusion) and c) chromatography theory (e.g. adsorption isotherms and column dynamics). Do you recommend that they work directly on the existing draft, or create new articles within the Eduzendium category, which the Editors can later merge as they see fit?

If you are too busy with the hosting/management issue to assist at the moment, please feel free to refer me to another editor. Thank you. Jean B. Hunter 03:13, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Jean, thanks for the feedback on the Eduzendium templates - there is certainly room for improvements, and they have not been integrated with Special:MetadataForm, since the latter does not yet allow customized preloading of content. The way things are supposed to work is the following:
  1. Go to the course homepage and add the titles of new articles, as shown here, using dielectrophoresis as an example.
  2. Follow the instructions displayed for Dielectrophoresis: Open this page in a separate tab or window to help you guide through the process, then go back to the window with the course homepage and click the button for Dielectrophoresis and try to follow the guide (reloading the course homepage after each "save" step is required). If there is anything not clear, please drop me another note - we really want these templates to be useful and will get rid of them if they are not. I have fixed the formatting for electrophoresis.
The error message you get about subpages is normal, since Eduzendium articles (and the course-specific templates) are in the CZ: namespace, for which the {{subpages}} template system was not designed. The articles to be created for the course, however, will all be in the main namespace, where the subpages template will function properly and set up the headers with links to the subpages.
As for chromatography, merging is complicated and very few people on the wiki have the technical permission to do that. So I would suggest that the students either jump right into the existing article, preferably after having familiarized themselves with basic formatting.
--Daniel Mietchen 09:49, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Mr. Mietchen, I began an article Crossflow membrane filtration without realizing there was a template already set up for our BEE 4640 course, called crossflow filtration. Professor Hunter suggested I seek your help in remedying the situation, as there is no need to have both. Can you point me in the correct direction? Thank you. Justin D. Finkle 19:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi Justin,
no need to call anyone Mr. here - we generally use first names instead, though you are probably right in treating your professor differently.
I moved your Crossflow Membrane Filtration to Crossflow membrane filtration to go conform with our CZ:Naming conventions and transferred the BEE 4640 formatting to it. I will ask Jean for his opinion on whether the final article title should be Crossflow filtration or Crossflow membrane filtration. --Daniel Mietchen 21:22, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi Daniel,
Let's keep it in its current form Crossflow membrane filtration. Thanks for your help. Jean B. Hunter 21:55, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you both for the help. Justin D. Finkle 23:56, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

New Biology Editor

We have a new Biology editor named Dorian Q. Fuller. Perhaps you may wish to put a welcome message on his Talk page. Milton Beychok 16:47, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Emails & forum messages

I was away for two days and now have more than a hundred of CZ messages in my inbox, and several hundreds of forum messages have been posted since I looked last. Will take a while to crawl through, and I will likely not respond to all that I normally would. If you think there is a post or message I should absolutely attend to, please give me a reminder here. If it absolutely has to remain private, then please send me a brief reminder message with "Citizendium reminder" in the subject line. Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 09:27, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Free space

I wonder if you would have an interest in contributing to the new article Free space (electromagnetism)? John R. Brews 20:29, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, John - I will see what I can do. --Daniel Mietchen 15:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

ME request

Please see Talk:Wikileaks. D. Matt Innis 19:45, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I am still on the road and won't be back to normal before Monday evening. The matter seems too complex to be resolved on the fly, so I think that locking the page just for the two discussants is the best for the time being, and I will get back to the matter as soon as I can. --Daniel Mietchen 00:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. The article is currently unlocked to all as Sandy has volunteered to try a rewrite. I'll follow your advice if it should flare up again. D. Matt Innis 01:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
I see you've taken care of it already, thanks! I'll enforce your ruling. D. Matt Innis 01:21, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Final reminder about Volatility (chemistry)

Hi, Daniel: I know you have been busy ... we all are. But it was back in early October when I added the discussions that you asked to be included in the subject article ... and which you promised to re-work.

I promise that this is my last reminder. Happy Christmas! Milton Beychok 21:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Hm - sorry, Milt. I have moved it up my list again, but may need another reminder. --Daniel Mietchen 22:14, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Approvals help please

Hi Daniel

I'm requesting approval on Miniature Fox Terrier, which has been sitting stable for a good long while, and which I can't approve as author, and Heterotaxis. Can you spare the time to lend a hand? Aleta Curry 00:29, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Aleta, I am afraid both articles are beyond the areas in which I can approve, but I will check them (had actually followed the drafting of Heterotaxis at the time) and see what I can do. --Daniel Mietchen 12:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
None of our currently active biology editors really work in quite the right field for either of these articles. Perhaps it is time to consider trying an experiment. For a long while now, I have wondered whether we could convince a non-citizen with the appropriate expertise to review and approve one of our articles. If the article is good enough and we make the process easy enough, we might attract a new member or establish a sort of consultant relationship. Would someone like to make an announcement asking whether anyone has a friend who would be qualified to approve one of these articles? --Joe Quick 15:51, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

User Discussion Page and Warning Removal

The discussion in this section is incomplete, since Mary has removed her initial contributions to it. Peter's second comment (still present below) contains all there is to say about the matter.

Yes, the email said that you could clear your talk page, to which I did not object. Note that I commented on the archived thread. --Daniel Mietchen 02:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Mary, there appears to be a misunderstanding concerning your talk page. Daniel left his remark on your archived talk page. Anyone can do this. Your talk page was not reverted by Daniel and no-one else has reverted his edit either. I understand that when things are tense, misunderstandings can occur. This only means that it is very important that everyone double check and reconsider before clicking the 'send' button. You should also consider giving people 24 hours to respond to your emails. D. Matt Innis 16:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Mary, the diff you cite does not show a revert but a comment added on your archived talk page, just as Daniel has indicated above. --Peter Schmitt 17:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Be reasonable, Mary! There is no reason at all for your indignation:
  • Nobody touched your user page
  • Talk pages are not taboo. There is nothing wrong with adding a comment to a section on an archived talk page. There is only one "threat": It may remain unnoticed.
  • Neither your talk page nor your archived talk pages were "reverted" or "rolled back".
  • If you read what Daniel wrote then you will see that he did not issue a second warning. On the contrary, he "deleted" the first one.
  • Doing so on an archived page is much more discreet than doing it on the current talk page. It shows that he accepts its removal from the talk page.
  • Daniel's comment was -- as his signature shows -- an official message by the ME. He is fully authorized to leave such messages.
--Peter Schmitt 18:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
On the advice of a esteemed CZ contributor I have removed all comments concerning this matter. I will be leaving an opinion piece on my user page instead. If I accidentally removed any other user comments I apologize in advance. My only intent was to remove my own comments. Mary Ash 19:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
For all concerned I removed the talk page comments as advised by an esteemed Citizendium member. Let's be clear about that.Mary Ash 22:58, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

My Smog Discussion Page Comments

Daniel I just posted this on the Smog talk page. Here's what I posted:

(unindent) First I did offer sources see:

       * EPA Region 9 Owens Valley
       * The Lake Project
       * The Federal Register
       * ABC Australia
       * Where vehicles are not the primary cause of PM10 pollution
       * A picture from the area 

They all clearly state the importance of PM 10 air pollution and the man made causes thereof. The only part I was incorrect about was the percentages given by a forest ranger many years ago. As this is an informal discussion, and not sourcing an article, the inclusion of personal information as part of an informal discussion is professional and warranted. Also, I contacted a seasoned CZ contributor about this talk page discussion and was assured that my comments were professional on my part. I do believe lively discourse and intelligent discussion, even if the viewpoints differ, does much for collaboration. In fact, I was strongly supporting the writing of PM 10 by professionals far better informed than I am as I do believe this is an important issue that needs to be written about. I was sincerely trying to encourage and compliment those who could do the task. As to my professional credentials when writing about PM 10, I could give a brief non-technical overview as I was educated by the air pollution control board engineers, water board personnel and other environmental personnel during my two years of providing professional coverage of PM 10 and other air pollution matters during my years as an environmental journalist. I am well versed in air pollution and its effects thanks to the many professionals who kindly shared their expertise and time so I could write about these topics.Mary Ash 03:11, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. I will not reply there, since you missed my points completely, and this is evident to anyone who actually reads my post there with some attention to detail. --Daniel Mietchen 22:30, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Nope. I did not miss your points but I do respectfully disagree with them. I made an attempt to compliment and discuss the authors concerned. I was hoping someone would write an article on PM 10 or add it to the smog article. It seems my comments were misunderstood as I originally commented on the man made events that caused significant and out of compliance PM 10 air pollution in the Owens Valley. Milt seemed to think I was writing about naturally occurring events and I was not. You can not compare naturally occurring PM 10 events to man made PM 10 events. The naturally occurring event will usually produce more PM 10 matter than the man made ones. I was using my personal experiences, and data, as a frame of reference as I do not have the background to comment otherwise. I'd offer the analogy of the old telephone party but that would be an American term and probably misunderstood. Suffice it to state I thoroughly understand the effects of PM 10 air pollution and non-compliance according to the local air quality control board, CARB, local water board officials and the EPA. They all thoroughly tutored me on the subject and I sold many a newspaper for a couple years covering this issue. Or a good journalist is a Jack (or Jill) of all trades but a master of none.Mary Ash 22:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

New user Joel M. Williams

Daniel, we have a new Chemistry editor. You may wish to post a welcome message on his Talk page. He is also a new physics author as well. Milton Beychok 03:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Milt. Done. --Daniel Mietchen 16:43, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

OASPA

Daniel, note 10, the link to Poynder's blog about the alabama shooting seems to be a dead link. Russell D. Jones 16:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Just clicked on it in your post above, and it worked fine. Dunno what the problem was/ is. --Daniel Mietchen 17:26, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Financial Report as of March 15, 2011

Please read our Financial Report as of March 15, 2001 for complete details on our financial history and our current financial situation. If you have any questions, please ask them on CZ Talk:Donate. Milton Beychok 00:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification, and for compiling the report in the first place! I had read it already, though. --Daniel Mietchen 01:10, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

New Physics and Mathematics author

We have a new Physics author, Amin Yazdani, whom you might like to welcome to the project. He is a student at a university in Iran. Bruce M. Tindall 14:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Bruce. Done. --Daniel Mietchen 23:22, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Nobel Prize

Hi, Daniel, please take a look at the discussion page at http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Talk:Nobel_Prize -- Thanks! Hayford Peirce 01:05, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

New Biology author

User:James Parker is a new Biology author, a student at Edinburgh interested in molecular genetics. Bruce M. Tindall 17:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - I left him a note. --Daniel Mietchen 09:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

European views about Libya

Operation Odyssey Dawn is perhaps not the best place for all activity, but it's something I can keep updated. I am eager to get European views into it -- I know very little, for example, of the German position. Improvements in the article are welcome, as well as suggestion for reorganizing on a broader set of articles. Howard C. Berkowitz 10:23, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The official German position is intentionally not a clear one, since there were elections last Sunday and there will be two more (in other Landers) this Sunday. Military interventions of any kind have very little support amongst German voters. --Daniel Mietchen 21:16, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

periodic table

As I was clicking through the periodic tables I noticed there was an improvement, if not fixed. Your recent edits must have been on the right track. Chris Day 16:13, 28 April 2011 (CDT)

I think it is fixed now. Good to see you back here! --Daniel Mietchen 16:18, 28 April 2011 (CDT)
I just checked some more and it is fixed. Good job. Glad to be back. I was just wading through some of the forum threads and the governance issues seems a little crazy. But nice to see many familiar faces working hard. I really must try and find more time for this. Chris Day 16:20, 28 April 2011 (CDT)
Thanks a lot for fixing that template problem, Daniel. And , Chris, it is wonderful to have you back. Milton Beychok 16:30, 28 April 2011 (CDT)

External Links for XML article

Daniel, I see that you posted a link on the XML article, in External Links. I really don't think that this is an ideal external link. If you're willing, I'll try to find some others, but remove that one. That link (http://lemire.me/blog/archives/2010/11/17/you-probably-misunderstand-xml/) is a rant by someone who doesn't seem to have a very broad understanding of how XML is used in the world, and his rant is one of those political stances (i.e., the rant against SOAP-XML) that I don't think CZ ought to represent unless the controversy is to be represented in full. Please let me know if it's OK to replace that link with some more general ones that would help someone get oriented more usefully about XML.Pat Palmer 10:47, 1 May 2011 (CDT)

Hi Pat, if you think another link would be an improvement (and I agree that there should be many better ones), then that's what wikis are made for. Surely no need to ask me (a relative newbie in that area) - just go ahead! --Daniel Mietchen 14:25, 1 May 2011 (CDT)
Speaking of XML, has anyone programmed an XML-to-MediaWiki converter? PLoS journals provide for downloading XML versions of articles, some of which CZ could import and develop further. Anthony.Sebastian 21:09, 1 May 2011 (CDT)
I have explored this in quite some detail over the last few months. So the general answer is no, but almost (see this discussion), while a specific answer for some kind of XML (which deals with taxonomic treatments) is yes, as shown in this article, and discussed more broadly here. However, discussing any application of that here at Citizendium is moot as long as PR-2010-013 is not amended, as discussed in the following section. --Daniel Mietchen 13:58, 2 May 2011 (CDT)

Re: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/PR-2010-013#Revised_phrasing_.285.29

Daniel, as you know, five rephrasings of your original, now on http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/PR-2010-013#Revised_phrasing_.285.29. Should you consolidate, submit as new proposal? What can I do to help? Anthony.Sebastian 21:04, 1 May 2011 (CDT)

It's probably time to submit it in some new form, yes. But for me, there are other important things to consider, e.g. Modifications to the Charter. Will see how we can move forward on these fronts, and any help and suggestion is welcome. --Daniel Mietchen 14:02, 2 May 2011 (CDT)
What do you think of using some BMC Q&A paper to test the waters? For instance, Who is H. sapiens really, and how do we know? could be used to beef up Homo sapiens, Human evolution, DNA, DNA sequencing and some related articles. --Daniel Mietchen 16:00, 2 May 2011 (CDT)


Press page

This http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Press appears as number 2 on a google search. Obviously, it needs you as a contact (and some other updating maybe. Martin Baldwin-Edwards 20:40, 2 May 2011 (CDT)

Yes. Thanks. Updated it a bit. --Daniel Mietchen 06:28, 3 May 2011 (CDT)

What do you think of Los Alamos National Laboratory?

Daniel, I think that Los Alamos National Laboratory is ready to be nominated for approval. Would you consider nominating it? Milton Beychok 06:00, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Milt, I read most of it and concur that it is in a good state. However, I will not nominate it, as I do not have relevant expertise. --Daniel Mietchen 02:47, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Criteria for becoming a Health Sciences Editor

Dear Daniel, I read the matter at http://ec.citizendium.org/wiki/EC:PR-2010-017/Healing_Arts_workgroup, which states, "Healing Arts Editors that are currently licensed to practice their discipline shall be accepted as Health Sciences Editors". May I ask you, as the CZ Managing Editor, how CZ verifies that a person is licensed - is it his/her Registration Certificate or his name being mentioned on his/her College web-site?—Ramanand Jhingade 18:03, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I would assume this verification to be a task for the EPA. --Daniel Mietchen 02:53, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

New Physics author named Jim Earl

Hi, Daniel: We have a new Physics author named Jim Earl. Please visit his Talk page and leave him a welcome message. Regards, Milton Beychok 08:02, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Funding for continuation of Citizendium

Daniel: Undoubtedly you have been thinking about ways to secure funding to continue CZ. Can you give us any encouraging progress reports? As ME, you have charter authority to contact outside sources for relations with CZ.

Have you put heads together with Larry on this issue?

Microsoft tried an Encyclopedia, then gave up. Perhaps they would like to participate in CZ. Funding-wise, partnering, making Encarta content available for updating, notifying their contributors about CZ.

Microsoft needs a much bigger toehold in the academic world.

I know you have many other passions besides CZ. How does CZ fit into your agenda? How do you see CZ's medium-term future?

Will you, as ME, speak to us on these issues? Anthony.Sebastian 19:20, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

It is entirely possible that Daniel will have an insight into the financial situation, I would also be interested to know his thoughts on the matter.
As far as his having responsibility for relations outside of CZ, you will also know that Cherter specifies that while the ME should represent the Citizendium in its relations with external bodies it is the MC who shall make all the financial and legal decisions for the Citizendium.
Since Larry is already part of the MC, and has indicated that he believes CZ shall not come to an untimely end due to finances alone, it might be more appropriate to ask the MC directly. Notwithstanding the fact that Daniel may well have been active on this issue, it is clearly one of responsibility for the MC, and Daniel would (I believe) only be representing the MCs wishes to outside authorities should he be discussing finances with them.
As to how CZ, or his role as ME, fits with Daniels agenda I of course have no clue. If your question was a personal one then excuse my intrusion - if your question was how his personal circumstances are affecting his role as ME then I think that a question best asked of all elected officials, for whom election carried some responsibility. I can assure you, however, that similar questions to Council members have found an unwelcome audience in the past.
You are correct that we have heard little about potential financial solutions, beyond paying for it ourselves. Really it is the MCs job to work out the finances, and while the outside world may need a go-between to explain the MCs position, here at CZ maybe we could all manage with just hearing what the MC are doing about it? Say, on the forum?
And as far as CZs any-term future goes, the statistics page will give you an idea of what direction CZ is heading in. CZ has been accused of being a "vanity site", alternatively a "hobby site", where a handful of members pay to have a space they can publish in, but that no-one will ever visit, much less use for encyclopedic purposes. Reversing that trend is likely to not be a purely financial consideration. David Finn 09:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
(CC) Image: John R. Brews & Aleksander Stos
Page edits from statistics page with superposed trend lines. Crisis points?
The figure at right shows some very broad trends. I wonder whether anyone at CZ has made an analysis of what has happened? If the trendlines are accepted there are three epochs: (i) Initial epoch of increasing activity ending mid 2008. This period ended with some catastrophic event that seems to be very tightly associated with mid-2008. (ii) Second growth period ending late 2009. This period ended with another catastrophic event and a short period of equilibration following it. (iii) Third period of steady decline, projected to end CZ altogether by late 2011.
What assessment has been made as to the origins and demise of the two golden ages and why has a third rebound not occurred? John R. Brews 14:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
The graphs on the statistics page do not show discontinuities in number of editors, although there has been a slow decline from the values in 2007-2008. The discontinuities in activity appear to be more related to activity of these authors on CZ. They became suddenly disillusioned? The really active authors left, leaving behind those not so productive? John R. Brews 15:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Data points?
D. Matt Innis 16:30, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
More points?
  • Charter drafting process begins October 2009.
D. Matt Innis 16:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

←(Out-dent)
John, thanks for following up on my query to Daniel re funding for CZ. I agree with the points you make.

Re: "As far as his having responsibility for relations outside of CZ, you will also know that Cherter specifies that while the ME should represent the Citizendium in its relations with external bodies it is the MC who shall make all the financial and legal decisions for the Citizendium."

Yes. However, that doesn't mean that Daniel, in representing CZ in relating outside CZ, cannot explore funding opportunities in conjunction with exploring partnering in the broadest sense of the term. Certainly, the MC will make decisions in those matters, though the ME has additional discretionary powers/obligations that might bear on this issue.

Certainly, if I knew a 'philantropist', potential large CZ donor, I'd want to receive advice from the MC what they want for the next steps. The MC might decide to investigate and set terms and render decisions, but they might not want to spoil any special relation I already have.

Matt, I thought of starting a forum topic saluting CZ's most prolific content contributers. What do you think? Perhaps a better way to highlight them, especially if that better way stimulated the less prolific to want to make the 'Dean's List', so to speak. Anthony.Sebastian 19:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC) [sig added]

Anthony, I think that is exactly the kind of thing we need - especially if it included links to articles that have red links that need further developing ;-) D. Matt Innis 20:25, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
I think this thread is something for the Forums, where I will respond as soon as I get a decent internet connection. As for the graph, I can't pinpoint what is behind the plunge in 2008 but the two other spikes are due to bot activity being stopped (September 2009) and briefly resumed (January 2010). --Daniel Mietchen 21:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
My reply is here. As for opening up a thread to thank people, I don't think we need another forum thread, and the best way to thank people for their work on articles is generally to improve some of those articles. --Daniel Mietchen 02:47, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Average edits

(CC) Image: John R. Brews & Aleksander Stos
Average edits

Daniel: A plausible explanation for the first discontinuity in this chart in 2008 is a sudden discontinuation of activity (for example the departure of a number of contributors), which removes a constant from the edit rate, causing an immediate downward step in Sept 2008. Casual observation in the science and math areas shows that there were indeed a number of withdrawals at this time. A departure naturally leads to a downward step, followed by a continuation of the same steady rise seen before that. The second drop, in 2009 may have the same cause,possibly augmented by a stop in bot activity, but the downward step is not followed by a continuation of the rise seen before the step, as expected from a step drop in activity.

And of course the steady subsequent decline is serious and unaccounted for. Without the brief bot resumption arresting this fall, causing a momentary flat plateau, the steady drop in editing activity would commence earlier, immediately after the second step drop. The onset of the present-day steady drop then would correlate with the event causing the second drop.

The steady decline seems to suggest the drop in activity is an ongoing phenomenon, as removal of one or more contributors would cause only a step down in edits upon withdrawal, not a continuing drop. Apparently CZ is seeing a net steady loss of contributors as time progresses.

I suspect the exodus in 2008 was not adequately addressed to find its causes, and a another, apparently more substantial crisis occurred in 2009, and is again being ignored. Whatever the underlying dissatisfaction, this time the impact is more serious. It undoubtedly is compounded by the financial situation, but I don't think that is everything. John R. Brews 15:46, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I can't add much to what I already stated above - "I can't pinpoint what is behind the plunge in 2008 but the two other spikes are due to bot activity being stopped (September 2009) and briefly resumed (January 2010)" - except that (1) I think you underestimate the bot contributions to the 2009 and 2010 spikes, (2) the rising flank of the 2008 plunge had a bot component as well and (3) a number of prolific contributors left in 2008, or at least reduced their activity here, but having just joined in myself then, I am not sure of any specific event(s) that catalyzed the drop. To find out more, it's perhaps necessary to dig around the forums or email archives. --Daniel Mietchen 21:51, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Applied Consciousness Sciences

Hi Daniel: See this discussion that indicates Matt is awaiting some more definitive action from a psychology editor before taking any action in deleting Applied Consciousness Sciences. As indicated on the talk page here and possibly here there is reason to proceed. The author of this article appears to have no great interest in responding to these remarks. John R. Brews 21:57, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

The main problem for me to place the deletion template is that there have been so many modifications to the Editor's role recently, and they are not easy to find (e.g. none of them are linked from the Charter), so I am not entirely sure what the exact procedure is. Will take another look. Pointers appreciated. --Daniel Mietchen 15:05, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Old Banner Still showing

Daniel, for non-logged-in users the banner announcing the call for nominations and elections back in June 2011 is still showing. Russell D. Jones 16:14, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Banners often seem to be out of date, and varying between pages. Peter Jackson 11:18, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
I had an occasional look at that over the last few days and didn't find any such wrong banners. But I know they do occur whenever we meddle with SiteNotice, and as far as I remember, this is due to caching. No idea about the deeper workings, though. --Daniel Mietchen 15:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Draft approved which shouldn't be

Alcmaeon/Draft: This page has somehow has "approved" status, but it's a "draft" page and shouldn't be at the approved stage. The Alcmaeon article is approved. Russell D. Jones 21:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I just looked at it, Russell, and it looks OK to me -- just a draft article.... What am I missing? Hayford Peirce 23:49, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
The top banner clearly states "post-approval draft version", which seems to be correct. --Daniel Mietchen 00:17, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
So why don't other approved articles have approved draft pages? Russell D. Jones 14:07, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Now I see what you mean - it is not that this draft page is approved, but that it is the only draft page listed in that category. That surely is a mistake and should be fixed. Will check. --Daniel Mietchen 14:19, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Fixed. Thanks for the hint and for insisting. --Daniel Mietchen 14:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Infobox template for planets

It appears that the parameters which are shown in the Tables on the page for the planet Uranus are the ones we should be using in the infobox for the planets. These are somewhat different than those for the dwarf planets so we can't use the same infobox for both. I have presented the parameters in two separate tables, but that procedure need not (should not?) be followed. Ideally, the infobox would tuck in just below the top image, or maybe the image could be the top-most element in the infobox. The only possible addition I could suggest for the parameters is the inclusion of the astronomical / astrological symbol.

Anyway, if you could devise the infobox, your help would be much appreciated. After it is ready, I will fill in the information and put them up on the articles for the respective planets.

James F. Perry 18:19, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, will do. --Daniel Mietchen 10:09, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Final draft Interview Correio Braziliense

Hi Daniel:

I made some further changes before I noticed you were cutting off further changes. I hope they can be incorporated.

John R. Brews 18:04, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

No worries. Forwarded the latest edits too. --Daniel Mietchen 03:33, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Daniel: What is known about the point of this exercise for Correio? I think it was a good exercise for CZ in causing a bit of thought about the project. John R. Brews 18:42, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
No response from their end yet, but the expected date of posting was somewhere around next week. --Daniel Mietchen 10:43, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Update

You forgot to change where it says you're the Managing Editor. Peter Jackson 17:52, 27 November 2014 (UTC)