User talk:J. Noel Chiappa

From Citizendium
Revision as of 18:56, 2 June 2008 by imported>D. Matt Innis (→‎Elizabeth II: new section)
Jump to navigation Jump to search


just hi

thanks for your helpful suggestions. (Did you work at BBN? I did, also from the MIT-enclave tho not a grad of any school with such a pedigree!)

I have a very early draft of the Halting Problem, what is your sense of it thus far? I'm trying to make a more accessible exposition for topics typicslly explained in dry and somewhat cryptic ways, without dumbing down the topic.

So I spose i am asking your opinion as to this style and approach in general ... http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Halting_problem

(I am planning to write a small cluster of related articles : Lambda Calculus, Godel's Incompleteness, Church-Turing thesis, and 'Quining' (self-replicating computer code). The latter provides a rather simple and clear (and referencable) proof-sketch of GIT and CTT. </more-than-you-needed-to-know> Christopher J. Reiss 14:37, 8 March 2008 (CST)

Thanks for your post on my Talk page about my article output

J. Noel, I have responded at quite some length to your post on my Talk page. Please read my response and let me know if you can help. Regards, Milton Beychok 22:34, 12 March 2008 (CDT)

subpages coded in metadata

I think we had a conversation on this topic although I forget where? Anyway, I was just doing some house keeping on the subpages template and noticed that there is a little known feature that remains in there, although not used or sanctioned. I had completely forgotten it was in there. Three fields, tab1, tab2 and tab3 can be used to create an unique subpage tab in any article. This idea did not really progress and I don't recall if any discussions happened or whether the idea was cut off fast. Chris Day (talk) 02:28, 15 March 2008 (CDT)

Hi

I must say Noel its a breath of fresh air having you around (I've noticed you've only being here a month!) Was wondering how the application for becoming a history editor is going? If you get accepted, I'd love to help you out with nominating articles for approval. Richard has written many articles on the early US history and I think many of them could be approved. Since he has been the only active editor in that workgroup he hasn't been able to nominate them himself. Regards, Denis Cavanagh 18:00, 22 March 2008 (CDT)

Borderline Personality Disorder

Noel:

Not sure what prompted your comments to Innis. I started this article, and am virtually the only one who has worked on it. There are no edit wars, of any sort, going on as your post would imply. Further, the large delete was appropriate, as the content was unabashedly anecdotal and not citable. --Michael J. Formica 11:04, 8 April 2008 (CDT)

So, Noel, as long as you're checking out dawgs and stuff...

...could you have a read through of Miniature Fox Terrier? Thanks! Aleta Curry 03:07, 13 April 2008 (CDT)

Template Recursion

OK, so what about ways to truncate strings? Has Wiki markup got anything like that?--David Yamakuchi 13:07, 14 April 2008 (CDT)


Well, I saw that where you linked me to the MediaWiki docs it says we can't do this, but this[1] is basically what I was talking about _trying_ to do. So,...how dey do dat? (Category:Editorial_Council)

Now, the template that is "called" to produce this, {{Editorial Council}} "calls" another one named {{Community}}, and that one kinda hurts my brain...or at least I'm having trouble seeing how we end up with what we do. Thing is, it's not really what we want for this template, I don't think...it really does look to me as if the author of {{Editorial Council}} didn't intend this to be the result. So now it's maybe really two things I'm asking...

  1. how dey do dat?
  2. how do we not do the recursion here, and so get the intended results?

Ain't computers fun!? :^) --David Yamakuchi 22:27, 18 April 2008 (CDT)

Metadata hack

Go ahead. I don't own these templates. Any improvements are very welcome. Chris Day 12:27, 15 April 2008 (CDT)

We should definitely start migrating documentation to {{Subpages/Doc}} and similar, I just didn't have time to start that. With regard to the metadata template it could definitely be metadata specific but I'm not sure how much you would save since we still want the tabs at the top of that page too. Or do we? Have a go at it if you wish. Looking at {{Subpages}} documentation with fresh eyes the metadata section should be with the core function at the top. let me know if anything else there makes no sense at all. I wrote that for myself rather than for other users so i expect it looks a little odd in places. Chris Day 12:47, 15 April 2008 (CDT)

abc

Interesting you noted the Fleming problem. I missed it when I passed through. Since this was by the bot this means we have many autobiographies out there that need to be fixed. Chris Day 12:56, 15 April 2008 (CDT)

Status works fine with the space. I did that when I was trouble shooting the {{WGTable}} template. It turns out that a space after an article title, before a pipe or bracket, means the status value cannot be read from the metadata template. I just went through the biology bio's and my guess is about 50% were wrong. You're right we do not have a bio cat although I saw someone suggest a biography workgroup which would help for the future. Chris Day 14:04, 15 April 2008 (CDT)

Transparency

I changed transparency to a disambig page, and I marked the metadata page as a speedy. I didn't see any need in just deleting it when it will probably do fine in its present incarnation. --Robert W King 10:24, 16 April 2008 (CDT)

Confused students

I've got more than one. In fact, one did an article on Wikipedia by mistake. I'm probably going to submit the page in question for speedy delete on Friday (unless there is a 180 degree turnaround). Hey I noticed you went to Andover. My niece is a junior there. I actually grew up in North Reading. --John J. Dennehy 14:07, 17 April 2008 (CDT)

Templates

If you make any changes to templates, can you go to CZ:Templates and make adjustments there? --Robert W King 15:20, 17 April 2008 (CDT)

Also, why not just tag obsolete templates for speedydelete? --Robert W King 15:54, 17 April 2008 (CDT)


Checklist_ templates

The names have historical significance rather than functional significance. I agree we should change them all to something more logical.

I've been meaning to delete all the obsolete subpage related templates for a while, since they just get in the way. i can barely remember what some of them were for so the sooner we axer the better in my opinion. Chris Day 17:22, 17 April 2008 (CDT)

Template:Subpages3

That is just my test article. I need to delete all that now. Just noticed your use of "automagically". Very funny. I think i used magically in there originally as Joe Quick was so surprised that the checklist appeared as if by magic. Your usage is far better. Chris Day 21:19, 17 April 2008 (CDT)

Actually it was Aleksander Stos who coined "magic". Chris Day 21:23, 17 April 2008 (CDT)

checklist term; keep or reinvent?

OK, I'm in two minds about this. Since we are talking about a subset of the metadata functionality (the other being management of approval status) maybe we should keep this term? One change that would make sense would be to have the pagename and variant included in the checklist. The only reason they were kept separate is that they were not part of the original checklist. I added those two later and did not want to confuse people who were already familiar with the old checklist. I also want to have the pagename as a distinct entity since it was critical it got filled in. Now we have the automatic error checks and better instructions (not to mention preloaded text for a new metadata page) I think they can all be lumped together.

Back to the name. Possibly we could call it Checklist metadata vs Approval metadata rather than Metadata content? Chris Day 21:48, 17 April 2008 (CDT)

I'll check the forum re: by field. I agree lets mull over the metdata format and nomenclature. If we're going to make changes we might as well make a lot all at once. We can use out recent experience to tighten it up and possibly make it more user friendly. While you're at it, let's think about any major improvements we can make. Your perspective is very different to mine since you are seeing it with fresh eyes. Any other things you can think of while you are at it, besides the by field? Chris Day 22:04, 17 April 2008 (CDT)

Editorial Council loop...aka doctor, it hurts when I do this.

I see now that, as you point out, the loop does indeed come from the page being a category, _and_ being in that category...that answers Q#1. Also, I think you answered Q#2 with a form of "doctor, it hurts when I do this....." to which naturally "well, don't do that" is an acceptable answer, but I still suspect we might be able to come up with a work around, what with all you guys are teaching us about templates and such...

BTW, Russell's paradox hurts my head when I think about it too... :-) --David Yamakuchi 23:26, 18 April 2008 (CDT)


Or we could just make a {{Editorial Council Category}} and be done with it...I think...except maybe for the double editing ( {{community}} and {{community without category}} ) if we want to change things later.

You know, it's curious but since you mentioned it, I just now was reading that Russell's solution to his paradox was to create a new level of "category" (tho he called them sets I think) that was "above" the one in question. I guess maybe he was right?

Either way, someone should check the thing (Category:Editorial Council) now that I've tweaked it to see that I didn't break something I just am unaware of...--David Yamakuchi 23:44, 18 April 2008 (CDT)

thanks

Noel, thanks for the link help on Computer Workgroup page. And more generally, for helping out in Computers around here.Pat Palmer 18:49, 20 April 2008 (CDT)

Noel, I think you should concentrate especially on those networking and computer history-related topics. You'll have a unique perspective that should be captured, and I think this is a good place for that. But before you dive in, can you tell me how you think disambiguations should work? For example, search on "apple". It goes to the page of the fruit, which has a disambig at the top, but shouldn't it go straight to the disambig, which then lets one find the fruit? I wanted another opinion before I go and change something like that.Pat Palmer 10:21, 21 April 2008 (CDT)

subpage bug

Thanks for pointing that out. I forgot to test the template on those pages so I forgot that header message would be there too. Now I see that subpage type I should automate the addition of the archive box too. For some reason those pages have never been on my radar screen. Chris Day 12:26, 21 April 2008 (CDT)

thank for the heads-up

Dam instead of dam. No problem. Thanks for the heads-up. George Swan 16:35, 21 April 2008 (CDT)

ABC

Joel, for the ABC= field, I have not been using capitalization unless the actual word is capitalized normally. I don't know if this is a rule or not, it just seemed logical to me. Do you if there is a rule one way or the other, or if the software automatically capitalizing the aphabetical listing anyway? Just curious. David E. Volk 08:33, 22 April 2008 (CDT)

header footer

Hi Noel, good job so far with all the documentation. Before you write more, for the article specific subpages i just realised that I can write the subpages template in a way that will generate the tab1, tab2 and tab3 subpage header and footer templates automatically. That will make the tab system much more user friendly (at least i think I can do it). I may even be able to do that with the all the subpage names which would make adding any new subpage trivial. I'll think about it a bit more tonight. Chris Day 17:10, 22 April 2008 (CDT)

your advice please...

I have some notes stored on Guantanamo medical care. You and I discussed it a bit within the last week or so. I have come across some new developments. And I would like your advice.

I am still trying to adapt to the different standards here. Articles here may require a higher level of scholarship. That is a good thing. But it may also require a greater level of interpretation. I am having a bit of trouble with this aspect. In my online comments prior to working on that other big wiki I didn't shy away from intellectually honest interpretation. But, on the other big wiki, I got out of the habit of doing so, trying to let the facts speak for themselves, to avoid challenges over POV.

Some of the feedback I am getting here seems to be telling me I should include a measure of interpretation, to provide context, and improve readability.

I think this recent article erodes the assertions that Guantanamo captives have received good health care.

  • Joby Warrick. Detainees Allege Being Drugged, Questioned: U.S. Denies Using Injections for Coercion, Washington Post, Tuesday, April 22, 2008, p. A01. Retrieved on 2008-03-01. “Nusairi, now free in Saudi Arabia, was unable to learn what drugs were injected before his interrogations. He is not alone in wondering: At least two dozen other former and current detainees at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere say they were given drugs against their will or witnessed other inmates being drugged, based on interviews and court documents.”


So, do you think I have that right? Should I try to allow a limited measure of interpretation into an article about medical care at Guantanamo?

Thanks! George Swan 18:49, 22 April 2008 (CDT)

More for your doppleganger file

Or, Why Redirects are a Good Idea, by J. Noel Chiappa

See Talk:Rap and Hip Hop#What's in a name? and hip-hop

Aleta Curry 19:33, 22 April 2008 (CDT)

Hold up here, Noel-- I'm not sure that we want to have Rap redirect to Rap and Hip Hop. Let me and Raphael and whoever else figure out how we want to organize this group of articles, and then you can feel free to redirect away. (Not that I don't appreciate the efforts, but just that you jumped the gun on this one.) Thanks, Brian P. Long 20:28, 22 April 2008 (CDT)

automated header footer

I was thinking of automating the categories at least (for example in the form of [[Category {{{tab1))) subpages]] etc.). But I have not thought about the repercussions. For example, spelling errors in the metadata for the tab name might be harder to catch if the categories are automatically generated. Let me thing some more. Chris Day 23:10, 22 April 2008 (CDT)

Just finished this. See what you think: {{Tab footer}} and {{Tab header}}. Example can be seen at Oxygen/Isotopes (tab1) and Oxygen/Element (tab2). Your thoughts on the generic language and the choice of categories would be useful. There is one big flaw here: If users mistype the tab name, i.e. Isotope instead of Isotopes, i cannot think of an easy way to monitor for such mistakes. On the other hand, i think this might be made up for by the usability issue, in that a unique tab name does not require an new footer and header each time. On my third hand, but maybe requiring a header and footer for each case might stop a massive proliferation of unwanted subpage names. One the fourth hand, isn't the freedom to create new subpages the whole idea. Basically, I keep going back and forth on this and have not really found a satisfactory position. Please dismantle and deconstruct these random thoughts as needed, thanks :) Chris Day 12:13, 24 April 2008 (CDT)
Also check out Cadmium for a potentially good example of the tab feature. In this case the subpage Cadmium/MSDS is used rather than the more obscure Catalogs tab. Further, the Infobox can link to sections in that MSDS subpage. Chris Day 15:34, 24 April 2008 (CDT)

Faraday

Noel, didn't you offer to copyedit Michael Faraday? Approval will be soon and it is better that you do it before. Thank you, --Paul Wormer 12:53, 23 April 2008 (CDT)

Article structure

Question for you on CZ talk:Article structure. --Larry Sanger 15:40, 23 April 2008 (CDT)

Romanization Proposal

Hey Noel-- You got the same email I did, I think, but I was wondering if you would mind being the other co-sponsor (along with me and Anthony) for the Romanization proposal. You are one of the very select group of people who has paid attention to the proposal at all, and the only other one (as far as I know) who is a member of the Editorial Council. It's not a big deal if not-- I'm sure we can find someone else, but you seemed like a logical choice. Thanks, Brian P. Long 05:24, 25 April 2008 (CDT)

Never mind about this-- Roger Lohmann has already asked to be the co-sponsor for the proposal. Thanks anyway! Brian P. Long 09:53, 25 April 2008 (CDT)

Two things

First, Noel: can you make a case for requiring the "strings" package to the citizendium tools list? And second, I'd like to send you some interview questions for the next issue of the Citizen; would you be intetrested? --Robert W King 10:00, 25 April 2008 (CDT)

Need some advice

Noel, I recently created a new article Large-scale trickle filters for wastewater treatment ... which is quite a mouthful. I did that so as to exclude any future editing to include small, rural residential trickle filters which deserve a separate article.

But I am having second thoughts. Perhaps, the article title could be shortened to "Large-scale trickle filters" and still accomplish what I want. I have not yet made up my mind on this.

But if I did decide to change the title, would you please give me the step-by-step procedure for moving an article and all of its subpages (including the Metadata and Approval pages)? I am not asking you to do it for me. I would much rather you told me how to do it ... so that I can learn to do it myself.

Thanks in advance, Milt -- Milton Beychok 17:08, 26 April 2008 (CDT)

Thanks, Noel. I have read the article you suggested on how to move an article. I have only one question. After moving the subpages, do I move the article Talk page before or after moving the MetaData page? - Milton Beychok 01:36, 27 April 2008 (CDT)
Noel, you asked for feedback on CZ:Using the Subpages template#Moving an article with subpages. I found it to be quite understandable. The only thing I would suggest is that it should make it very clear that the main article and its assocated Talk page are the last things to be moved. Thanks again, - Milton Beychok 13:26, 27 April 2008 (CDT)

I'm not making more work for you, I promise..

Hi Noel, I've got a question for you since you seem to be more familiar with the various help/how-to pages than I am. Whenever I notice a question about what English variant to use, I refer people to CZ:Editorial_Council_Resolution_0005. This is not something that anyone who didn't already know it was there would find. I'm wondering if this information is a more visible location that I am unaware of? I've checked Article Mechanics but didn't see it. --Todd Coles 12:56, 27 April 2008 (CDT)

{{Physical properties}}

Chris/Richard/Noel, would one of you be able to take a look at Phosphorus/MSDS#Physical__Properties and help me figure out how to get rid of the extra whitespace in the Mass and Electronegativity cells? I'm stumped. It looks like it's coming from the line breaks in between lines in {{Physical properties}}, but when I remove them, the table stops recognizing the new rows for some crazy reason...#^%$!!!. It seems like it's possibly something so simple someone with a fair amount of wikitable knowlege will scoff at it, but sadly, that aint me. So, if you have a couple of minutes to spare, please...scoff away :-) --David Yamakuchi 21:45, 27 April 2008 (CDT)

Never mind. I got it!--David Yamakuchi 23:07, 27 April 2008 (CDT)

I just blatently stole something I saw on the metadata templates. If you see a more elegant way to do the same thing, then please do implement...--David Yamakuchi 20:42, 29 April 2008 (CDT)

Checklist22

How can you not love this name? ;) Chris Day 00:23, 29 April 2008 (CDT)

No, no, not a joke. It's a crap name. You're right. But now you mention catch 22, we could always make up some yarn for it's "true" meaning. Chris Day 00:32, 29 April 2008 (CDT)
Light dawns on Blockhead?  :) And who is this DaVinci fellow? Artist and scientist you say? Next you'll be telling me he was an engineer too! Chris Day 00:40, 29 April 2008 (CDT)
I was playing on the famous Schulz phrase from peanuts "you blockhead Charlie Brown", isn't the port Marblehead? Chris Day 00:46, 29 April 2008 (CDT)
Ah, i missed the sarcasm, and we agree on Calvin and Hobbes. I am no CB fan but I do rememeber that line. Chris Day 00:55, 29 April 2008 (CDT)
OK, not sarcasm, feigned ignorance. Either way I missed it. Chris Day 01:00, 29 April 2008 (CDT)

Wikipedia template

Do you still see the same problem with the footer going over the wikipedia template at Talk:Yangtze Patrol? And I agree the talk page blurb is better hidden. We can always go back to the original format once people get a sense for whther they like it this way or not. . Chris Day 01:43, 29 April 2008 (CDT)

header footer update

Yes I did see the reply thanks. I just got finished adding the code that means any subpage tab generated by using tab1-tab3 will use a specific header or footer, if they exists. If not, the default will be to use the generic Tab header and Tab header. I have also set it up so that the category Experimental subpage is added to a subpage that is missing either the CZ:Subpage name or the Category:Subpage name. It needs to have both to lose the automatic addition of the experimental category tag. You can see an example at Lead where tab1-tab3 are all used with only the test subpage having both CZ:Test and Category:AS-Test. Iron has an Isotopes subpage that uses a defined {{AS-Isotopes header}} template rather than the generic {{Tab header}} template used by all three of the tab defined subpages in the Lead article. I will work to refine this tomorrow night incorporating some more of your ideas. Good night. Chris Day 01:57, 29 April 2008 (CDT)

Let me see if I understand this: If you have "tab1=Foo", then if either 'CZ:Foo' or 'Category:Foo' does not exist, then you stick the page in 'Category:Experimental subpage'?
I'm still debating the concept of naming the header/footer templates {{AS-Isotopes header}}, etc; my first thought was that it would reduce the likelihood of a name clash with another template, but somehow I think {Isotopes header} (etc) are already pretty unique. Can't hurt, though - and it also enables us to find them all quickly, because of the "AS-" at the start of the name, which is probably a Good Thing.
Sorry I bailed on you last night with no warning - I basically just keeled over! J. Noel Chiappa 19:35, 29 April 2008 (CDT)
My idea for the experimental page is that if someone is blundering around with the tab1-tab3 options the chances of them filling creting a CZ:foo page AND a Category:Foo are very remote. Thus such a category gives us a chance to monitor these types of errors before they become chronic. Hopefully this would mean sorting through the AS-foo prefix group is not required; a last resort. Chris Day 20:21, 29 April 2008 (CDT)

A possible tagging system i just added as a kludge for trying to find the different article specific subpagenames is [[Special:Prefixindex/Category:AS-subpagename]] as well as [[Special:Prefixindex/Category:Group-AS-subpagename]]. Check out this link for what we have so far. AS stand for Article specific, do you think that needs to be spelled out? Chris Day 03:07, 29 April 2008 (CDT)

Is there some functional difference between the first two, or are they just different possible names? If the latter, either one would be OK, but I'm a 'keep it short and simple' kind of guy, so I'd go with 'AS-subpagename'; that's a lot better than the long one I suggested! And there's no need to spell it out, I think - but others may feel different.
Speaking of others, you want me to bang out a rough draft of the /Proposal for this? J. Noel Chiappa 19:35, 29 April 2008 (CDT)
Only difference is that the group-AS-subpagename one represents a reduced set. I guess it depends on how many of these article specific subpages will develop. I suspect AS-subpagename is sufficient and the group ones can be more conventional. I definitely need to write this up as a proposal. Probably a simple version as well as a more technical one. (not to mention the sub-workgroup one!). Chris Day 20:21, 29 April 2008 (CDT)

Talk pages and hide buttons

Hi, Noel: The Talk pages suddenly unhide the MetaData Page and the Checklist page. Is this going to be permanent? The Hide buttons work but only until I have left the Talk page. When I return again, those pages are unhidden again.

For what it is worth, I vote for leaving them hidden all the time. - Milton Beychok 12:05, 29 April 2008 (CDT)

Hi Noel!

I was pleasantly surprised to find we have more common interests than networking alone. Yes, my first decision to be a Wiki-refugee was in the Computer Networking Project. It wasn't so much that I kept having to explain that OSI compliance, let alone conformance, was not a requirement for IETF protocols, or that BGP is not an application layer protocol. It was, I think, being told that something was incorrect, in an IETF document of which I was a coauthor, because the editor's unnamed textbook said so. It was also the mantra of everything having seven layers, even after I cited the ISO documents on the internal organization of the network layer, management framework, routeing (ha!) framework, etc.

Not yet knowing the culture here, is it appropriate to try to develop an outline of networking topics and then start filling it in? By and large, I wouldn't want to take any of the Wikipedia material, which was just too hacked. The articles on control and forwarding planes may be worth salvaging, once they are sprinkled with holy water to exorcise some of the persistently wrong "corrections".

Where I do think I have some Wiki material, which has value as a starting point, is in (military/strategic) intelligence and special operations. There are, for example, relatively few discussions anywhere of MASINT. The process of intelligence analysis is another area where some politics need to be extracted.

In these and other areas, I have to sort out the rules here about using material that I may not be able to find in secondary published sources, but have been doing for a frighteningly long time. There have been a few cases of "I don't know if it's documented anywhere, but that's not what my code did."

It's surprising how much organic chemistry comes back now that I'm writing proposals for sustainable biodiesel, in a semi-closed cycle between fishing boats and seafood restaurant waste.

Howard C. Berkowitz 09:36, 1 May 2008 (CDT)

Can you...

...take a gander at this CZ:Proposals/Should_we_allow_article_specific_subpages?? make any changes that you think will make it easier to understand. Thanks Chris Day 00:26, 2 May 2008 (CDT)

How did we want to handle this?

[2], --D. Matt Innis 19:33, 3 May 2008 (CDT)

Template:Lead/Compounds

Yes, I seem to have done something to make the pages that include both the physical properties, and the compounds listings to have a huge pre-expand size. I'm not sure how to avoid this tho, the way I'm currently displaying them, I have to load the whole template to access any one single data member. When I display the entire template, with perhaps dozens of different variables, the "size" is huge...perhaps there is a better way to display? Is there a better way to store maybe?

Perhaps if we keep the number of "member variables" (aka properties) low, we won't get hit too badly on the size? But that might mean more types of templates: Electrical Properties Templates, or quantum properties (see {{Template:Lead/Isotopes}}, or other, as yet unknown types of "properties" data templates...IDK...I'm just making it up as I go...:-)--David Yamakuchi 00:19, 5 May 2008 (CDT)

You just gave me another idea too...but it might be a few days before I can tool around with it.--David Yamakuchi 00:21, 5 May 2008 (CDT)

This problem was exactly what i was thinking when I wrote the first paragraph here. I'll be interested to see what solution you come up with. Chris Day 09:49, 5 May 2008 (CDT)

Strings

Stephen says:

"

Email tools@citizendium.org Stephen Ewen 14:01, 4 May 2008 (CDT)

"

FYI---David Yamakuchi 00:33, 5 May 2008 (CDT)

Fast tracking subpages

I just replyed to a couple of your questions on my talk page then remembered you like have the replies here. I'll leave them there for context but there is one other point you made that I will reply to here. That is the issue of backlogged suggestions for subpages.

I am wondering if the way to go to reduce the backlog for new subpages is to just promote the tab option in metadata page as much as possible. Get people creating as many subpage types as they wish. In the process of setting up tabbed subpages the users will eventually create their own CZ:subpage description and Category:Subpage, and thus, those subpages will no longer be listed in the experimental subpage category. With time we'll see which ones work and which ones bomb. Those that work can graduate to "standard subpages". Those that don't work will just quietly disappear. This seems a little more organic and will promote the experimentation with new types of subpage without the need for a formal backing from CZ. If nothing else a really bad idea for a subpage will get people discussing the issue, expecially if it starts to propogate. The current problem is that the activation energy to get new subpages started not only stops tha bad ones but also the potentially great ones. Chris Day 10:12, 5 May 2008 (CDT)

Crafting a unused subpages list based on the workgroups and a yet to be defined subpage hierarchy (hierarchy based on more general to very specific subpage usage) was the way i was thinking too. I have no solution in mind but this is a problem worth solving. Chris Day 11:20, 5 May 2008 (CDT)

Locators and identifiers

Do you have something on hand that would address this function decomposition in addresses, which I originally learned from you? It would help articles on addressing and routing, and it seemed reasonable, rather than hunt for cites, just to go to the source. Howard C. Berkowitz 13:08, 6 May 2008 (CDT)

subpage or metadata

The more I think about this, the more I think it might be better on the metadata page. Initially, I was thinking the metadata page might not be so great since it can be a scary place to edit. This is probably groundless though since all authors here have to be familiar with it and it's not going away anytime soon. Certainly it makes the coding a lot easier and simpler. This an important point since it is already hard enough to navigate through the subpages template hierarchy. Also, I hate that <noinclude>{{Subpages}}</noinclude> code at the top of the definition subpage. Chris Day 00:51, 8 May 2008 (CDT)

I think you've already reversed yourself on this (?), Chris, but I wouldn't like that--even the regulars who are reasonably comfortable with metadata pages wouldn't like to see it there. Is there really any substantive advantage to having it there as opposed to on a subpage? --Larry Sanger 15:20, 9 May 2008 (CDT)
Filling out the metadata page isn't that bad, although I am still playing with the indexing sequences. The real challenge: is there a way to open an existing page and edit it directly, rather than having something tell me I need to change something and open it for me? Is there a magic word? ...said Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 15:29, 9 May 2008
Yes, just go ahead as you do in wikipedia with no subpages template. If you do use the subpages template it will make you dot the i's and cross the t's. That's the way computers like it. :) Or is there something else you are referring to? Part of the reason for the many preloaded links is to ensure that the page titles are accurate. One typo and the subpages temaplte cannot function correctly. Chris Day 15:36, 9 May 2008 (CDT)
Example: I've been rethinking the collating sequence for the titles of related articles, such as the intelligence series. To change the sorting order, I assume I need to get into the metadata page and change it there. So far, I haven't found any obvious manual way to get back to the raw metadata page. Another possibility would be adding or changing a category (e.g., I've been putting intelligence into military, but politics, electronics, economics, and other categories may make sense). For that matter, is 3 categories a hard limit? Howard C. Berkowitz 15:47, 9 May 2008 (CDT)

anchorencode: problem

So close, but so far. I want to have "Cell (biology)" in a url but the anchor trick gives me "Cell_.28biology.29". Click on the add definition to see the problem (also see Template:R#Example_of_use).

What I need is something more similar to {{BASEPAGENAMEE}} but that trick is not available to me in this case. So is there something else, similar to anchor, but changes "Cell (biology)" to "Cell_(biology)"? Chris Day 22:24, 8 May 2008 (CDT)

By the way I can do this fine when I'm within the cluster, see the red link in the to do list at Talk:Cell_(biology). The problem is if i want to do it from outside the cluster using the parameter from the {{r}} template. Chris Day 22:49, 8 May 2008 (CDT)

Is there any reason not to use {{urlencode:{{{1}}}}}}? It seems to solve the problem. Is there an advantage to using {{anchorencode: as opposed to {{urlencode:? Chris Day 22:56, 8 May 2008 (CDT)

Can you make a template out this, please?

Noel, this is a table of the equivalence of various units of pressure, which I have in my sandbox. Can you make it into a template so that it can be inserted into various articles at the point where an author places this tag: {{pressure}} ?

The table came from Wikipedia and I was a significant contributor in formatting and revising it on Wikipedia. I have re-formatted it and simplified it a bit for porting here to CZ.

If you cannot make it into a template, do you think that Chris Day might be able to do it? Thanks in advance, - Milton Beychok 20:24, 11 May 2008 (CDT)

Hey, Noel, have you had a chance to think about this yet? Can you make the template? Milton Beychok 01:59, 12 May 2008 (CDT)

{{pressure}}--David Yamakuchi 10:40, 12 May 2008 (CDT)

Need help

Can you make head or tail of this, it's a strange thing I discovered when transcluding the definition subpage. In the current form the definition starts on a new line after the noinclude tags. To cut to the chase, the line break is transcluded in some cases but not others. For example:

* Biology: {{:Biology/Definition}} gives:

  • Biology:

The science of life — of complex, self-organizing, information-processing systems living in the past, present or future.

* Biology: {{#ifexist: Biology/Definition|{{:Biology/Definition}} }} gives:

  • Biology: The science of life — of complex, self-organizing, information-processing systems living in the past, present or future.

Note that there is no line break when I transclude the definition subpage within an expression (Please correct my lingo here, I'm not sure how to express this in english). Why the difference? I also note that I can get rid of the line break by putting the whole of the first example in code tags. So:

<code>* Biology: {{:Biology/Definition}}</code> appears as:

* Biology: The science of life — of complex, self-organizing, information-processing systems living in the past, present or future.

Can you explain what is going on here? This might be a problem in the future for using the definition subpage unless the definition starts immediately after the noinclude tags or it is always between tags or within an expression when we transclude it. Chris Day 11:49, 14 May 2008 (CDT)

Same thing happens in wikipedia. So here is the thing, if we're going with the definition subpages rather than the metadata route should we code it as follows:

<noinc1ude>{{Subpages}}</noinc1ude><!--
-->Definition here.

Or go with the following:

<noinc1ude>{{Subpages}}</noinc1ude>Definition here.

Rather than:

<noinc1ude>{{Subpages}}</noinc1ude>
Definition here.

In this way we can transclude the definition in anywhere. Any thoughts, apart from stick it in the metadata page ;) Chris Day 12:53, 14 May 2008 (CDT)

CZ:Unchecklisted Articles

Hi Noel. I noticed in the recent changes that you had edited the CZ article, and I was curious as to what it was about. I'm still unfamiliar with some many of the processes and policies involved in CZ, so I wonder if you could take a look at the two articles I've created so far: Belfast and Belleek Pottery Ltd to check if I've done everything correctly. The thing I noticed was that the article on Belleek china has no template displayed at the top of it (though it's displayed on the talk page) whereas the article on Belfast has the template on both the main article page and the talk page.

My suspicion is that it has something to do with the 'copied from Wikipedia' flag: I copied my own text from the article I had created in WP, whereas I wrote the start of the Belfast article from scratch.

Let me know if I've done anything wrong, or omitted something I could have done. Cheers, --Mal McKee 12:18, 15 May 2008 (CDT)

sub-subpages

Noel, is there a simple way to call up a list of all "sub"-files? For instance, if there is an article: Iron and I would like a list of every page that is "Iron/*.*", can that be simply specified? (please forgive my having to lean on DOS commands to communicate here, but what I'm looking for here is basically "dir" :-)--David Yamakuchi 14:44, 15 May 2008 (CDT)

Click on 'Special pages' in the menu on the left, and then click on 'Prefix index' and type in "Iron" in the box. Then select your article namespace option. --Mal McKee 15:21, 15 May 2008 (CDT)

Changed R template to accommodate disambiguation

I just made a modification to the {{r}} template to show how this could work.

Consider Reel, it is a redirect to Reel (disambiguation) where three meanings are described one each for dance, music and textiles. None of these three currently have articles but all have a definition page. In this case Reel/Definition also exists as well as the Reel redirect. However, i have changed the R tempalte code such that it will ignore the Reel/Definnition page IF a disambiguation page exists. Instead it will point to the disambiguation page. Thus:

{{r|reel}} will look as follows:

  • Reel [r]: Please do not use this term in your topic list, because there is no single article for it. Please substitute a more precise term. See reel (disambiguation) for a list of available, more precise, topics. Please add a new usage if needed.

Note that the link to Reel is purple indicating that it is a redirect. An author should notice this ambiguity and choose the correct link. Depending on the context this would be one of:

{{r|Reel (dance)}} {{r|Reel (music)}} {{r|Reel (textiles)}} that would show as:

  • Reel (dance) [r]: A folk dance, associated especially with Scotland. [e]
  • Reel (music) [r]: A type of tune in 2/4 or 4/4 time, to which the reel can be danced, common in "Celtic" musics such as Scottish traditional music and Irish traditional music. [e]
  • Reel (textiles) [r]: A device for collecting newly-spun thread or silk. [e]

Depending on the context the bracketed diambiguation might not have to be used. For example, if the link is on the related articles subpage for sewing the author might prefer to use the following format:

{{r|Reel (textiles)}|Reel}}

  • Reel [r]: A device for collecting newly-spun thread or silk. [e]

It is possible to have the R template manage another complex example. Consider the scenario where the Tux article exists as one of our approved articles AND has a disambiguation page as well as a useful Tux/Definition subpage. In such a scenario the Tux definition might be expected to be overlooked and point to the disambiguation page similar to the coded example below:

I have avoided this by coding such that the Foo/Definition subpage is only avoided when there is no metadata template for the basepagename Foo. Thus, in this Tux example:

{{r|Tux}} would look as follows:

  • Tux [r]: The name of the penguin, official logo and cartoon mascot for the Linux computer operating system. [e]

Let me know what you think, don't understand and would like to tweek to suit your desired model. Chris Day 15:19, 15 May 2008 (CDT)

If your goal is to deal with the problem like Tux then I'd say the best bet is to undo the last change I made to {{R}} where it assays for the existance of a cluster and still acknowledges defs like Tux/Definition. If nothing else it will be easier for authors to notice the article names that have a disambiguation pages. Do you want a category for all article names with a disambiguation page? I can get the subpages template to add it to the talk page of such articles. Chris Day 22:40, 15 May 2008 (CDT)
I just changed the R template such that Tux and like articles will point to the disambiguation page. So now the last example with Tux above will not be as it used to look!, and will now make no sense.
With regard to categories, another useful one might be to locate the pages that have an R template pointing to a disambiguation page. The advantage of this category is that one can catch some disambiguation pages that do not have a corresponding article in citizendium (if they exist). It will also let us find the R templates that need to be adjusted to locate their more accurate home. So examples like {{R|Tux}} can then be pipelinked to {{R|Tux (Linux)|Tux}}. Chris Day 22:47, 15 May 2008 (CDT)

!!!!

Hilarious, i am editing the Template:Def right now! And I'm going to rewrite the text in the CZ:Definition so there is no temptation to do what it suggests. :) Chris Day 12:12, 16 May 2008 (CDT)

The trigger for me was reading the CZ:Definition page and realising that a specific template was actually quicker than writing the whole {{:Biology/Definition}} term. So clearly there was no reason ever to do it that way. The side effect occurred to me when I was writing {{Def}}. Nice to see all the def writing on the recent changes, certainly this has got people thinking and the Related Articles pages are starting to be used more too. The community heard a penny drop somewhere. Maybe the "figure head titles" will be next? Chris Day 12:41, 16 May 2008 (CDT)

R again

I had always assumed that was standard when a template started with a *, ! or ;. I have come across that a few times and it just became another one of those mines you have to navigate. I was never surprised by it as a result of my trial and error approach to writing the templates. As they say, ignorance is bliss. :) Chris Day 13:54, 16 May 2008 (CDT)

move bot

Since it might be some time before the move function is automated for clusters possibly someone could write a script that a bot can use? Not ideal, but at least it would make things faster and easier. Chris Day 14:10, 19 May 2008 (CDT)

Eduzendium Testimonials

Cheers --John J. Dennehy 16:30, 19 May 2008 (CDT)

Lists, catalogues, related articles, and how to format them

Hi Noel,

Hayford and I are having a problem over at Science fiction. Specifically, when is an organised list a catalog as opposed to Related Articles list, and more importantly, how on earth do we format 'em?

Here's what were going for: Science fiction/Related Articles. Is there a good way to organise this? indent this? Note what happened when Hayford added 'Frankenstein' under Mary Shelley, and also what I mess I made trying to place 'A Wrinkle in Time' under Madeleine L'Engle.

Aleta Curry 17:36, 19 May 2008 (CDT)

Hi, Noel, I think I've got things straightened out -- BUT, I don't know how to put the red link and definition baloney back on the three Chulz Voine books I just added. Could you be a pal and do that? I'm sure Aleta and I will prove to be quick learners and will be able to mimic your decisive edits.... Thanks! Hayford Peirce 18:24, 19 May 2008 (CDT)

Noel, see my reply on Aleta's talk page. I think I have made R more generally useful with out breaking its current role on all the RA pages. Its a bit of an ugly fix but it might work OK if indenting and numbering are not its primary function. Chris Day 02:04, 20 May 2008 (CDT)

indent

Good idea for having the "indent=" as a nbsp by defualt. Not sure why it currently comes out as if in a box. I was thinking indent was too long as well. Lets see if aleta can come up with something more user friendly. Chris Day 07:36, 20 May 2008 (CDT)

Well i biked to work and realised the simple fix was to move the space. It used to be {{{indent|*}}} [[link]] and is now {{{indent|* }}}[[link]]. Now I have been playing with your version {{{3|* }}}[[link]] which i like a lot since there is no field name to worry about. But the problem here is that the second variable might be rarer than the indent. What do you think of having the second variable as the indent and when the name variation is used we need to define the indent, i.e. {{r|Foo (bar)|*|Foo}} instead of {{r|Foo (bar)|Foo}}. The alternative is that we have to use the second variable when we want to indent which seems counter intuitive, i.e. {{r|Foo|Foo|*}}. Any thoughts? byt he way, I have no idea what the formatting issues are with the double indent (**) at the front. I usually don't try and figure those things out (as in I can't) and just try and work around them. Chris Day 09:53, 20 May 2008 (CDT)
Cool that {{r|Name||**}} work fine, i didn't think to try it. Do you think that {{r|Foo (bar)||Foo}} will work too? I think indent will be used a lot more than the second name so it would be nice to be able to write something as simple as {{r|Name|**}}. I wonder if the double line will cause confusion? My four hours sleep is not what it seems. I normally get at least six hours but broken into to two. I normally crash out while reading stories to the kids and sleep for about three hours. Then I have my nocturnal activity followed by another three- four hours. Chris Day 10:19, 20 May 2008 (CDT)
Good point about having to track down all the {{r|Foo (bar)|Foo}}'s. I'm definitely going to let those sleeping dogs lie. I'm going to change R to your streamlined version and let Aleta know. I'm sure she'll be happy with no field name. Chris Day 10:35, 20 May 2008 (CDT)
Great additions to the R/Doc. I had not thought of that, too focused on the indenting problem. Chris Day 11:17, 20 May 2008 (CDT)

Templates are easy

... as easy as anything you are used to... Anyway, I have created {{Gla}} and described what I am aiming at. If you could help with that, this would be very cool! In the meantime, I will try to draft a basis for {{Dabdef}}. -- Daniel Mietchen 11:16, 21 May 2008 (CDT)

Thanks for your help with dabdef. -- Daniel Mietchen 19:24, 22 May 2008 (CDT)

Preload

Can you preload the contents of a template to a page that already exists, i.e. using Template:DeleteRedir for the cleanup? That has never been possible using my computer (mac). Chris Day 15:54, 21 May 2008 (CDT)

I suspect the time it worked was for one that had already been deleted? Chris Day 16:05, 21 May 2008 (CDT)

Defs with a slash

Shouldn't GNU/Linux/Definition live at Linux as GNU/Linux redirects there? Certain the Subpages template pukes it out as Linux is not a recognised subpage. Chris Day 22:31, 21 May 2008 (CDT)

Another thing. Anything you move on that list at Category:Move def, it is fine not to add the speedy template to the Template:Def Article name. Note the white garden example that gives me a delete link after the move; {{move def|white garden}} gives:

Template:Move def

Chris Day 00:24, 22 May 2008 (CDT)

Took me a while to sort out that that meant! (That you saw a delete link once the def had been moved.) J. Noel Chiappa 08:50, 22 May 2008 (CDT)
Oops, sorry, i deleted it by mistake when i went through to get rid of the red links in Category:Move def and thus destroyed my example. Do you get what i meant though? No need to add the speedy delete as I can see which ones are ready to delete at the category page. Chris Day 09:58, 22 May 2008 (CDT)

Disambiguation

So what's up with Half-life example, is that the way we're doing it? Is will that be a redirect? Also should the template go below the subpages otherwise the subpages header will jump up and down as you navigate from the article to the subpages and back. Chris Day 10:14, 22 May 2008 (CDT)

Faraday's law

What did you to the definition of Faraday's law? Earlier today Daniel did the same to energy. I told him that it looks blöd (german for daft) on my user page and that is where the business with redirecting and moving energy started.--Paul Wormer 10:20, 22 May 2008 (CDT)

Anchorcode

Yes, it is anchor code problem but the urlencode is even worse. We'll have to edit those type manullly. Chris Day 16:05, 22 May 2008 (CDT)

Redirects

Thanks for the answer. I understand that if someone uses alternate spellings, he/she will get the results for that. However, I am afraid that if they only use one spelling that is different enough from others, they won't even be aware of other articles.--Gary Giamboi 20:20, 22 May 2008 (CDT)

This is part of it

No responses from anyone interested in the article. D. Matt Innis 07:39, 23 May 2008 (CDT)

Talk page fate during a move

Could you summarize this based on your experiences moving articles? I'm seeing that talk from a disambiguation {basename} get redirected. Do we mormally delete talk pages for a pagename move not involving a disambiguation? Or is it best to keep them as redirects, especially if they are linked from other pages? Any other scenarios you can think of? Chris Day 15:20, 23 May 2008 (CDT)

That makes total sense. In that case I should add a what links here link so it is possible to make a decision on the talk page. Alternatively just have all talk page redirected regardless? The latter will make it more user friendly. I'll think this over and see what is possible with the move template.Chris Day 15:37, 23 May 2008 (CDT)

planets

Are all eight going to xxx (planet)? Saturn and Earth probably should. That leaves Jupiter. Chris Day 17:10, 23 May 2008 (CDT)

I guessed there would be something but I'm not up on all my Roman Gods. I like the plan for the move template i.e. it only function on the metadata page. Chris Day 07:51, 24 May 2008 (CDT)

help needed in French words in English

Hi, Chris and Noel (alphabetical order!), could one or both of you take a look a the French words in English article and see if you could figure out a scheme to index the list of words with a TOC so that we can go directly to the A's, for instance, or the T's. We're now at the point where there are so many words that it's beginning to become quite tedious to scroll up and down a gazillion times a day. Many thanks! (PS, you don't have to index all the letters -- just the first couple, so that I can see how you did it: I'll then take care of all the rest....) Hayford Peirce 11:59, 24 May 2008 (CDT)

Many thanks! I saw all the different edits you made in order to get it to work. Wow! Eventually I'll try playing around with the formatting somewhat -- in a sense, it's gonna look strange to have 26 (or somewhat fewer) letters just descending the top of the page all by themselves. Maybe something will suggest itself one of these days.... Thanks again! Hayford Peirce 16:09, 24 May 2008 (CDT)
I wuz just mulling those possibilities over -- but now you've told me how to do it! Thanks -- I'll play around with it for a while.... Hayford Peirce 16:42, 24 May 2008 (CDT)

linking to redirects

Oh, I see now. I had just assumed that the page had been moved/renamed, and that like got missed. Ah well. By the way, I seem to have run down my big TODO list. Any other jobs for me? John Dvorak 19:14, 24 May 2008 (CDT)

disambig box

However you think it should work--make it work like that. --Robert W King 20:01, 24 May 2008 (CDT)

More on definitions

I thought about this, and I think someone else thought about it also, but what is your opinion on using Template:H:title? --Robert W King 13:47, 25 May 2008 (CDT)

I just had to tell you I laughed out loud

... at AstronomerAmateur. Although it's completely tongue-in-cheek, it frames the problems with Wikipedia with razor-sharp precision. I'm glad you jumped ship and came here! -Eric M Gearhart 17:47, 25 May 2008 (CDT)

Disambig formatting

Hi Noel, something seems to have gone wrong on CZ:List of words with multiple uses - independent of whether I use r or rpl. Please take a look and comment. Thanks! -- Daniel Mietchen

What I meant here was the colour coding of the links to the few existing disambiguation pages. But I am also wondering whether we should disallow definitions for disambiguation pages or change the "Add brief definition" text to something like "Please do not add a definition here; use the definitions of the sub-meanings instead". Besides, I am wondering whether the disambig page itself would profit from consistent use of the r template (just tried it with Energy). -- Daniel Mietchen 08:14, 26 May 2008 (CDT)
Chris has already adapted the colours. As for using the r template, I am much in favour of it and will ask Larry to comment. Or should we include this into the implementation issues of your proposal? I'd rather not, as this might slow things down there. Also, please take a look here and comment if necessary. -- Daniel Mietchen 11:10, 27 May 2008 (CDT)

Complex disambiguation and redirect pages...stop me before I alias again

Trying to follow your suggestions, I got very energetic with redirects to U.S. foreign military assistance organizations. Note that a number of redirects are to subheads in the article.

Further, when I redirected MAC, the abbreviation for Military Assistance Command (a subhead), I realized MAC was ambiguous, and tried my hand at disambiguation.

Have I totally confused things, or am I within the scope of licit conduct for the Wikideities?

Howard C. Berkowitz 14:38, 27 May 2008 (CDT)

dabdef

I think that the only source of the disambiguation message is at {{dabdef}}. I rewrote it a bit to accommodate a situation where the disambiguation page does not currently exist. Chris Day 14:44, 27 May 2008 (CDT)

More thoughts on this. Is there any point in keeping definition pages that have an equivalent disambiguation page? For example, Foo/Definition and Foo (disambiguation). There are two options. To add the dabdef to all Foo/Definition pages with a disambiguation page or just delete them. I favor the latter since they appear to serve no real purpose. To stop them polluting the definition category i have adjusted the subpages template to put them in the Category:Dabdef Subpages. For an example see Jupiter/Definition. Any thoughts on this? Chris Day 13:37, 28 May 2008 (CDT)
I would go for the latter option, too. -- Daniel Mietchen 13:46, 28 May 2008 (CDT)
If we go that route, we can use the Dabdef Subpages category as a guide to find the ones that need to be deleted/dealt with. Assuming we can get these categories to update properly. It appears that the pages never update unless there is an edit to the page. I suspect someone has turned off the function that search for changes in the categories and reassigns the page. I can see that might need a lot of computing time, especially as the number fo pages increases. Chris Day 13:48, 28 May 2008 (CDT)
Bear in mind that Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Dabdef will only get the ones that have the dabdef template. There will be others that do not. That category will catch any /Definition that exists with a disambiguation page, as long as there is a subpages template. Possibly it does not matter if they exist as they will never be called, I've already made sure that the subpages template does not categorize them as useful definitions and that is all that really matters. Chris Day 21:31, 28 May 2008 (CDT)

JavaScript

Deleted along with its metadata template. D. Matt Innis 19:26, 27 May 2008 (CDT)

Ju-on (呪怨)

Well, thanks. Actually this film series's titling's a nightmare because of all the alternative titles (and that's before we get into romanization - Ju-on, Juon, Ju On, Ju on... John Stephenson 04:22, 28 May 2008 (CDT)

Disambigs and page naming

Hi Noel, I seem to have created some irritation (and resulting feedback) with my disambig testing (a kind of reaction that I largely prefer to no reaction, but dunno whether that's good or bad for the proposal right now), and so please take a(nother) look here, here and here. Thanks, and sorry for causing trouble. -- Daniel Mietchen 05:11, 29 May 2008 (CDT)

I'm dizzy from all this activity

Don't you think that Vertigo is gonna need a disambig page etc one of these days? Surely the Hitchcock flick will turn up.... (Maybe I'll do it for the Write-a-Thon.) Hayford Peirce 14:02, 29 May 2008 (CDT)

Moving clusters

Hi Noel, I try to move all pages associated with the article I move but I have found no simple way to ensure that. Is anybody working on the cluster move code? Ideally, that would automatically indicate what subpages there are, and move them all by default (perhaps optionally excluding some, e.g. the talk page in disambig cases). I would volunteer as a tester (using just pages I created myself, with no further contributors, to avoid confusion). -- Daniel Mietchen 02:29, 30 May 2008 (CDT)

Since you mention it, I have made a start on making a template that gives ALL the right links for doing a move more efficiently. It's still in the works though. It is far from ready but can be seen at {{move}}. See some discussion at User_talk:Chris_Day#Template:_Def and User_talk:Chris_Day#Move_template.2C_etc. Chris Day 02:43, 30 May 2008 (CDT)

HELP!

Noel--Can you please move Victoria of the United Kingdom to Queen Victoria and Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom to Elizabeth II We had a newbie come in who ignored all our long discussions and moved things around. GRRR. Richard Jensen 14:03, 31 May 2008 (CDT)

Biggest page

Ah, that would be Nepal/Catalogs/Tourist attractions via Special:Longpages. I don't know how many of those can be split up, but I find it interesting what gets the most attention here. :) John Dvorak 12:42, 1 June 2008 (CDT)

Alphatbet

As you requested, m'lord, I have broached the topic of moving the letters to a more disambiguated page. I'm not at all sure of what is required for this. I assume this is to trivial for a proposal, but it seems like there should be another obstacle. Let me know. John Dvorak 16:31, 1 June 2008 (CDT)

Hrm... I just noticed something. Even when you move the old metadata page to the new one, there still exists a redirect from the original spot. I could go through and speedydelete those, but I'm wondering if it's worth it? Will it do any harm to leave them? This is sure making me want that move bot :). Hey, could it be set in the bot so that if you move a metadata or approval page, it speedydeletes the old one? Just some food for thought. John Dvorak 17:46, 1 June 2008 (CDT)
Yeah, not a big deal. It'll just be nice when it does get here. By the way, where's all that work you promised me with all the astronomy articles? :) John Dvorak 21:55, 1 June 2008 (CDT)

re:WP Info

Nope! Pure coincidence. Those were the only articles that had pretty much stayed pretty much as I wrote them. Although I was clicking the wp box for them (I might have accidentally forgotten to on a few though). Marielle Fields Newsome 08:09, 2 June 2008 (CDT)

documentation

Are you going to incorporate Robert Kings template into the preload of Doc? I have to admit I have not used his template for any of the documentation pages I have written. Mine usually evolve with time as I write notes to myself. Chris Day 11:08, 2 June 2008 (CDT)

Elizabeth II

Hi Noel, I'm going to need editor approval to delete this one. --D. Matt Innis 19:56, 2 June 2008 (CDT)

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:J._Noel_Chiappa&oldid=412305"