User talk:Chris Day: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Chris day
m (Text replacement - "North American Network Operators Group" to "North American Network Operators Group")
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{|align="center" style="border-top: solid 1px #AAAAAA;border-right: solid 1px #AAAAAA;border-bottom: solid 2px #666666;border-left: solid 2px #666666; background-color: lavender;"
{{NoResponse}}
|colspan="2"|
{{User:Chris day/talk header}}
|-
|{{User:Chris_day/talk_toc}}
|rowspan="2"|
{{User:Chris day/useful links}}
|-
|{{User:Chris day/newmessage}}
|}


{{User:Chris_Day/talk_header}}
{{TOC|right}}
==Notes to self==


== I aim to restrict my replies to this talk page.... ==
{{r|European Physical Society}}
My hope is to preserve the context of each discussion rather than having them fragmented on mutliple talk pages. So please check back here for replies to messages you leave, thanks. Please sign comments with four tildes <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> This makes it a lot easier to follow the ebb and flow of a discussion with multiple users. Indents are also useful to help track the sequence of replies and can be achieved using colons such as ''':''' or '''::'''. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 23:32, 13 November 2006 (CST)
{{r|EPS}}
::For the benefit of newcomers, I mention that this can easily done by putting the page on one's watchlist, or setting the preferences to do so automatically.[[User:DavidGoodman|DavidGoodman]]


==Lead in homeopathy==
[http://www.eps.org/ The European Physical Society]
It's been suggested (not by me) that the new CZ style might incorprate a short and simple boxed message, and that for this article, that box might contain the text:


"Homeopathy is an Alternative Medicine system that tries to treat illnesses with tiny doses of the drugs that cause the same symptom as the illness. Homeopathy is based on the ideas of Samuel Hahnemann, a 19th century physician who observed that some contemporary medicines evoked symptoms similar to those of the illnesses for which they were prescribed. There is no clear evidence to support the efficacy of homeopathic remedies, and it is likely that the reported effects are placebo effects."
<nowiki>{{Quote|A|B|C|D|E}}</nowiki> gives:
{{Quote|A|B|C|D|E}}


Keeping this here so we can see how it looks if and when style issues advance[[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 12:25, 9 November 2006 (CST)
:<nowiki>{{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}}}</nowiki> gives {{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}}}
:<nowiki>{{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|R}}</nowiki> gives {{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|R}}
:<nowiki>{{#ifexpr: {{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|R}} > 3000 | large|lemma }}</nowiki> gives {{#ifexpr: {{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|R}} > 3000 | large|lemma }}
:<nowiki>{{#ifexpr: {{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|R}} < 3000 | large|lemma }}</nowiki> gives {{#ifexpr: {{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|R}} < 3000 | large|lemma }}
See:
:- [[/Notes to self]]
:- [[/Previous discussions]]


:That would make more sense. I have been trying to track down the CZ style guide/ideas with no luck.  I have seen discussion here and there but nothing concrete.  Am I missing something obvious? [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 12:31, 9 November 2006 (CST)
[{{fullurl:Special:Movepage|wpOldTitle=Test_articleA&wpReason=Testing}} movelink]


::Hi Chris, No, you're missing nothing obvious, except that there is the intention to establish a new style on CZ but no firm proposals yet as to what that should be, just some suggestions as to what it might include. One of the initial functions of the pilot I think is to start discussions and experiments with style and layout.
[http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?action=edit&preload=Template%3APreload_Article&title={{urlencode:{{{1}}}}} <font color=#CA3D10>{{{1}}}</font>]
*How should the r template deal with  links to catalogs?  Could use a separate 4th level definition but which related articles page should it link too?
*Apostrophe bug means that the tabs are not the correct color.  Fix the code to account so the if statement compares the url code.
* Manual placement of <nowiki>{{dabdef|Fossilization}}</nowiki> needs the basepagename added manually too.  If follow Noel's description will need a field in the metadata for any article that is the target of the basename redirect. No other way to figure out the basename for the {{tl|dambigbox}} template otherwise.  Alternative is do have a much more manually (for example, <nowiki>{{dambigbox|the process in [[palaeontology]]|Fossilization}}</nowiki> ) template but probably better to have it placed automatically. Drawa figure to make this more comprehensible.
* Need to write a summary document describing the uses of {{tl|RD}}, {{tl|R}}, {{tl|Rpl}} and {{tl|pl}}.
* For {{tl|R}} should probably remove the {{tl|Dabdef}} template and just write what is required.  Could then have a specific template for the disambiguation request for a definition page if it is needed (I suspect no one would use it and instead just make the disambiguation page).  One exception might be Daniel in combination with the RD template at [[CZ:List of words with multiple uses]]
* Subpages template misinterprets location on the talk approval talk page (not sure I can replicate this).
* Think over subpages format. Possibly need subpages style as third layer template with intermediary ones to define the magicword variables? Initiated this, see {{tl|Parameters1}} and  {{tl|Parameters2}} in conjunction with {{tl|Subpages test}} and  {{tl|Subpage style test}}.
*If no footer or header add specific category to note this fact, preferably no other categories too. See [[homeopathy/Trials]] example.
*[http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Air_pollution_dispersion_modeling/Catalogs/Models/Definition must think about the status of these sub and subsub defintion pages].  Note also that they exist as definition onlys rather than recognising the existance of the basepagename.
*Lemma articles mess up the related only category such that related articles can only exist if there is some metadata.  Try and write around (is this true?  not sure I can replicate this either).
*Finish userplan simplification and more focus on workgroup participation.
*Fix move cluster - partially done, still need to fix approval page bug (when article has no approval page or when there is already an approval page present)
*{{tl|Lemma}} idea,  see {{tl|Test lemma}} too. Need to utlilise the pagesize magic word so we get a lemma when there is no, or very little text in an article.
*optional photo credit
*Article task and notification list
*Metadata edits always current so should tie speedydelete etc to that one page. This will get around the maintenance categories often being out of date.
*<s>Think more about /Catalog/Masterlists</s> See [[User_talk:Aleta_Curry#Masterlist]] for examples. Fix the same page blank code, At present there is a capital letter requirement bug as well as need to get second string if used. Also catalog masterlists and transclusion in general. No need to maintain information at multiple sites.  Is substitution bot an option?
*Figure out utlity of transcluding refs with the r template redirects.
*Make error boxes more concise and smaller.
*Finish up the periodic table navigation, specifically whether element data shoul be in a switch page on on individual subpages


::Everything has been moving fast but unevenly; it's still very, very early days.[[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 06:55, 10 November 2006 (CST)
<nowiki>{{r|Nova (astronomy)#Supernova|Supernova}}</nowiki> gives: {{r|Nova (astronomy)#Supernova|Supernova}}
<nowiki>{{r|Supernova}}</nowiki> gives: {{r|Supernova}}
::Iteresting that the top version does not work as expected.  Might need to fic the r template to asccomodate tis , if possible. 06:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


:::OK i'll kep my eye open for these discussions. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 16:22, 10 November 2006 (CST)


Thank you Chris for your help. [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 13:04, 24 November 2006 (CST)
::[[/Wanted]]
Need to figure out the disconnects between the rare earths periodic table of elementses and the template:periodic.  Did uranium, but others need fixing too. See [[Uranium/Periodic table of elements]]


== Moving pages to avoid piping links ==
:[[:Category:False Start Move]]
:[[:Category:Incomplete Move]]
:[[:Category:DeleteMove]]


Rather than moving pages or piping links, I would put in redirects on the alternative spellings or capitalisations. The article should reside at the correct name with the correct capitalisation, not the common of most often used name. On the other spellings put in code like # REDIRECT [ [ SomePage ] ] to guide users automatically to the correct page without having to pipe anthing.
== Too many pop-up alert messages when starting a new article ==
:That is a good point.  I had forgotten that redirects could be used for alternative forms. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 08:30, 1 December 2006 (CST)


Chris, two things that have niggled me for quite some while:


?? No idea??[[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 12:10, 4 December 2006 (CST)
*'''Whenever I create a new article in my Sandbox and then use the "Start Article" link in the left-hand navigation panel:'''


As soon as I cut and paste the article from my sandbox into the new article (including the subpages template) and save it, three or so large popup alerts are displayed on the main article page (ahead of the article text) telling me why they have appeared and alerting me to do certain things (like filling out the Metadata template). They must be overwhelmingly confusing to a new user writing his first article. The various pop-ups are separated by a heck of a lot of white space ... so that one must scroll down quite far to even see the main article text that I just cut and pasted from my sandbox.


We need to start building a Style manual with stuff like this, or maybe  Help 2.0 [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 15:02, 29 January 2007 (CST)
Can those pop-ups be made smaller, with less excessive white space between them? Or can they be combined into one pop-up and made less wordy?


== Bacteria ==
*'''After I've created the Definition subpage and the Talk subpage:'''


Here's an [http://www.cdc.gov/healthypets/diseases/ecoli.htm e.coli] on a government site that we could grab, but it is B/W. I'll keep looking for a good color photo. --[[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 16:35, 4 December 2006 (CST)
The Talk page has more pop-ups telling me to create the Related Articles, Bibliography and External Links subpages. Again, one must scroll down to below those pop-ups before adding a post or reading any existing posts.


Chris, check out the salmonella picture on the NIH website.  It's colorful [http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/NR/rdonlyres/3C434CF7-E288-49D9-9937-AE5A6D90C8DB/0/ANTHRA_1.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www2.niaid.nih.gov/Biodefense/Public/Images.htm&h=1456&w=1500&sz=500&hl=en&start=42&tbnid=uSOvKVXGhuvGJM:&tbnh=146&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dnih%26start%3D40%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3Dcom.microsoft:en-US%26sa%3DN]  --[[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 14:14, 10 December 2006 (CST)
Once the Main Article, Metadata template and Talk page have been created, why not autiomatically create the Definition, the Related Articles, the Bibliography and the External Links pages complete with the subpages template included in each of them? Then, instead of all those pop-ups on the Talk page, all that would be required is one sentence stating that the Definition, the Related Articles, the Bibliography and External Links subpage need to be populated as soon as possible.


== Chris, could you take a look at these 2 articles? ==
I think the above suggestions would greatly simplify the task of starting a new article. What do you think? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 07:00, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


In [[Barbara McClintock]], I made some changes as per your suggestions and hope that accuracy has been improved. Would you please take a look? Secondly, if you look at my user page (talk) you'll see a reference that David Tribe put in for the first genetic map. I need to correct a mistake I made about that in [[biology]], but I do think that we should try to work in the concept of a genetic map, can you help? thanks, [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 08:19, 10 December 2006 (CST)
: The messages (including the whitespace) for starting an article could easily be changed in [[Template:Orphan subpage]].
Please take a look at the biology talk page.[[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 12:25, 12 December 2006 (CST)
: Concerning the talk page messages I have already filed a wish in [[CZ:Wishlist]] "Obtrusive requests to edit subpages". Again, they could easily be made smaller without having to create them at once. (I do not think that it is useful to create empty pages.)
==Biology marathon==
: However, both messages are as they are on purpose. Thus the pro-and-contra should be discussed, at least briefly.
Chris, I'm writing a letter to Larry, and then putting it up in Forums- look for it. Meanwhile, I'm going through all the history of article and the discussion to see who contributed. I need that information for the text of the letter. In doing so, I came across a comment you made about a correction you did in the part about proteins (your comment was something like: the proteins were not sequenced, the DNA was). The correction is fine, it's just that your comment made me realize the age difference between us, and how that colors our point of view.  When I was an undergraduate back in the 70's, the big news was sequencing ''proteins'', forget about DNA.  It was a big deal to figure out the exact amino acid sequence and then laboriously "hand calculate" how they folded and what the exposed sites were and do the experiments that confirmed the structure. Anyway, as much as we may have irritated each other along the way of the biology marathon, I want you to know that when I wrote it was a pleasure to work with people who are kind and bright  in my user page- I was very much thinking of you.  [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 08:41, 13 December 2006 (CST)
: (I agree with you, Milton) --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 11:13, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
:Nancy, Thank you for your kind words, although you may be underestimating my age :)  When I was an undergraduate Fred Sanger was still a hot topic, my lecturer believed he could have won three Nobel prizes for his work.  And they did not let us forget how lucky we were to be able to use the new dideoxy sequencing, let alone not having to attempt Edman degradation.  That said, i worked in a mitochondrial lab for quite a few years and there I did experience the importance and distinction of peptide sequencing.  Firstly, to identify the cleaveage point of the mitochondrial import peptide it was critical to determine the peptide sequence of the amino terminal.  Secondly, rarely we found discrepancies between the mtcDNA and mtDNA sequences. This was obviously a big deal since it could potentially lead to a different amino acid in the protein. Of course, we later realised that these were not our sequencing errors but rather an observation of the bizarre RNA editing that can occur in the mitochondia. In summary, we always need to be aware of where our sequence comes from, either DNA cDNA or peptide. I think you are correct to suspect that much of this is lost on the new generation of scientists. In fact, recently i had a graduate student who did not recognise the rRNA bands on their northern blot! I was blown away, but should not be surprised since we these topic are barely mentioned in lecture these days.  
:::Glad someone else said it. I thought it was just my ignorance, you know, like it wouldn't bother people born into the Internet era.   
:Anyway i think the team effort made the biology article come out pretty well. I look forward to future collaborations. Actually, I see McClintock is already on standby for number two! [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 11:06, 13 December 2006 (CST)
:::Not to insult the original crafters, because we've all been working in the dark on this and I still think that clusters are a brilliant idea, we just need to tweak every once in a while.
:::While we're at it, could we PLEASE remove Albert from the metadata fill in form?  I keep re-creating page [[Albert Einstein]] and getting a 'you're messing this up' error message, which confuses me no end.
:::And let's remove CanE and AusE as options in the language variants.  No one ''writes'' in Canadian English or Australian English, we might as well have Indian English or Trinidadian English. We only need American English and British (or Commonwealth, if you'd rather) English.
:::[[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 22:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


== Talk link ==
:::: I have removed "Albert Einstein" from the field in the blank template. (I hope that nobody minds.) On this occasion I found a Metadata template wrongly attributed to Einstein. (There may be more. And there are quite a lot of Metadata requiring "abc=Einstein, Albert" that will need to be fixed.) --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 01:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


Chris, what did you do to get the (talk) at the end of you signature?  It's driving me crazy not to be able to just click on the talk link!  --[[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 10:30, 19 December 2006 (CST)
:::::In retrospect, it should have been Werner Heisenberg. --[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 03:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
:Hi Matt, first you need to set up your preferred signature in the '''''my preferences''''' above.  Write into the signature box <nowiki> [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]]</nowiki> (make sure you tick the raw signature box). If you paste that wikicode into the box, every time you type the four tildes your signature will look like this --> [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]], with links to your user page and talk page. I hope this helps. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 12:04, 19 December 2006 (CST)
::::::You're just so certain of that, aren't you.  [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 14:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
::This is my test... wish me luck --D. Matt Innis 12:25, 19 December 2006 (CST)
:::lol!  I'll try it again.. --[[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 12:27, 19 December 2006 (CST)
::::YES! Thank you!!! --[[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 12:27, 19 December 2006 (CST)


== Chris, re your proposal to remove certain external links in "Systems Biology" article ==
:::::::I do not think these alerts should go completely but we could hide most of them behind ONE generic message per page saying "Hey, something is missing or wrong. For details, click [show].". An example for such hidden stuff is at [[:Category:Bot-created Related Articles subpages#Index]]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:09, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


Chris, you say you're not sure we need the external links to labs and conferences in the 'Systems Biology' article. I feel strongly that they add to the quality of the article. For example, clicking on the link to the Institute for Systems Biology provides the reader with additional depth on the goals and approaches in the discipline not contained in the CZ article, examples of application, and webcasts. CZ gains that at little cost in space or distraction.  
::::::::I happen to like the alerts.  As rarely as I create and/or move pages, I don't remember the procedures and all that has to happen; and I'm not willing to go look up those procedures every time. But having the alerts reminds me of what I need to do to get the article "off the ground."  It's a checklist, but not in a checklist format.  I was unaware of the Einstein Bug.  I don't know that I'd like the "something's missing" format either. It smacks of "we know something you don't, he, he."  If the templating can tell me what needs to be done to get the cluster to an operating standard, then it should. [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 16:16, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


Moreover, those labs and conferences abound with experts in many fields, as systems biology operates as an interdisciplinary discipline. Whether those experts discover the CZ article linking to their sites, or we apprise them of the article (or related articles) as potentially benefitting from their expertise, CZ may have a chance of gaining their participation in the project.  
:::::::::I think you have to place yourself in the shoes of a newbie, Russell -- all of these alerts, and *long* blank spaces down through which one has to scroll, are *baffling*.  "Hey, they asked me to create an article, I did, and NOW what?!  WTF is goin' on here?  Where's my article?!  What am I supposed to do with THIS?!"  Etc. etc.  Even to me, after starting maybe 150 articles, I find it annoying.  And THEN there's the stoopid Talk page, with the big blank space in the middle with the mysterious boxes on the right telling us to start a Related Articles page and a Bibliography, and god knows what else!  It looks terrible!  Fortunately I've found an answer to this:  I click on each one of these demands, go to the newly opened page, type in an "x", save it, and do the same for the next one. Which at least cleans up the Talk page.  Let's ask ourselves: for *whom* are we creating these minotaurian complexes?  Howard and his Lemma articles? Heisenberg and Einstein and Schrodinger and his Kat to do Thought Experiments with? or for Billy Bob Thudpucker in Las Cruces, New Mexico, who just wants to write a brief article about the third-string banjo picker of the Rolling Stones?  And while we're asking questions, I wonder how many of the dozens of new Authors who arrive here and then *never* contribute anything have actually *started* to write something, and then got scared away by all the inscrutable baloney they're then *apparently* required to do?  So they curse, or shrug, and go away, never to return.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 16:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


I would suggest a compromise: Let's leave the links in, and I will go through each one, eliminating those sites that offer the reader little or no added-value to the main "Systems Biology' article.  
::::::::::I would consider pages started empty or with an "x" as their single content as close to vandalism. The blank spaces can be removed easily, and it should also be possible to place the talk page messages more effectively. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


Thanks for considering this.  
:::::::::::If the blank spaces and messages can be removed or made less intrusive, then why aren't they?  Who put this stuff in there in the first place? And putting an X in there isn't remotely *close* to being vandalism -- it's exactly the same thing as going into an edited page and putting in a Null so that the damn server or whatever decides to notice that a change has been made to the Metadata page, such as when we change the ABC and then it doesn't show up on the Workgroup page until the Null has been put in. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 16:50, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 13:31, 19 December 2006 (CST)
(undent)Can a variable be set in a user profile, which is then available to templates? The default might be "newbie". Russell would want a "verbose" mode. I would want to suppress the "suggestions"--in user design speak, "terse" or "expert" mode.


Retrieved from "http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki/Talk:Systems_biology"
In some respects, the idea of the lemma came about as a means of entering minimum useful content without going through full cluster setup, some of which will never be relevant.   
:Hi Anthony, certainly i can live with having some of the links.  It just seemed a little strange having an exhautive list. One wouldn't consider such a list appropriate for a more mature science. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 15:32, 19 December 2006 (CST)


== THANKS! ==
Daniel, separating the issue of removing spaces, there is no real reason to demand External Links or Bibliography. Many articles will never have them, so they can go to the list of optional pages such as Catalogs and Debate Guide. Related Articles as a suggestion, yes. The suggestion of having other articles link to this article is useful only to people that understand the overall structure, who then should not need the reminder.  Now, a link to a tutorial on knowledge navigation is another matter.


No way! Real Life - what's that!  Thanks so much, hopefully you can get back to help me clean up before we approve. Thanks Chris.  --[[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 14:10, 20 December 2006 (CST)
Hayford, your point is well taken about scaring away newbies. The newbie mode might even suppress anything beyond the minimum and post the article to a page for more experienced people to clean up. Remember the art historian? How much work would we have saved if she had just written the article and let us do the other pages? This is one of the reasons I hesitate to make instant Editors.


Chris - can you make one more read through on the chiropractic article and make sure it satisfies your concerns.  That way when we get Nancy and Gareth back, we'll be ready to approve quicker. I think the links look much better and the article is better for it.  Thank you! --[[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 09:40, 21 December 2006 (CST)
Eduzendium also shows that it's rather overwhelming; Daniel's macros/templates helped a lot. If I may try an analogy, we are "cataloging". When I went to work for the Library of Congress, I was amazed to discover how much skill and knowledge is needed to create a correct catalog card. There is an enormous difference between even the scholarly ''users'' of the Library, and the professional catalogers. We are simpler at present, but does the newbie even notice the "workgroup" tab on the left? At LC, the catalogers needed to go far beyond that, but both are still controlled vocabularies. I still am confused when something is "Media" vs. "Journalism". --[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 16:46, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
:I happen to think the templating here is exceptionally sophisticated and I appreciate that it can sculpt the CZ experience.  I agree with the above that some of the mechanics are skewed (e.g., having to create a null edit in order for the server to update its status), but the "white space" experience, I think, is not intended for you to scroll through to get to the article; it is intended for you to fix the problem that is identified.  But for people who create a lot of pages, I can see that it might be tedious to go through these hoops again and again when all you do is a null edit.  Also, I see the problem of EZ.  I take about 200 students a semester through the learning process of editing on the MediaWiki software and I can tell you that for a lot of them, even learning where to click to actually open the edit window can be a challenging undertaking.  Complicating the scene with sophisticated templating raises the intimidation (or fear factor) of the site. 
:So I see three levels of users here.
:# An author new to wikis who doesn't want to or will be overwhelmed with cluster set up.  (maybe in the article creation process the article could automatically be tagged (category) with a request to set up cluster; experienced hands could take care of the list.)
:# An experienced author who likes the process checklist to set up a cluster.
:# An experienced cluster setter-upper who knows what to do and can't be bothered with the alerts. 
:Also I see issues of what exactly is needed for a bare-bones cluster set up: Metadata, certainly; definitions? maybe.  Bibliography? probably not.  talk page? shouldn't need a null edit.  [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 17:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


== metabolism ==
::I [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template%3AMetadata_to_finish&diff=100630370&oldid=100580612 took out] some of the talk page alerts &mdash; feedback welcome. Will take a look at the page creation stuff later. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 17:56, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


Chris, please look at metabolism, when you have a chance.[[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 09:45, 29 December 2006 (CST)
::: Since this has evolved to a discussion of the merits and dismerits:
::: I think that the information seen from the subpages template is enough: It shows what subpages exist. Those who know about them and are willing to work on them can easily start there -- if they do not want then they will ignore the templates as well. (I do ...: many pages do not need external links, and many will not get a bibliography, and why create either when one has no good idea what to enter? The same is true for definitions - better no definition than a bad or incorrect one.)
::: Moreover, CZ explicitly encourages to start articles the "easy way" (see [[CZ:Start Article]]) -- without subpages.
::: -[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 23:00, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


::::I now also hid the alert messages for missing metadata. The following pages are some of those that do not yet have the {{tl|subpages}} template, so you can use them to fiddle around with the new mechanism and to provide further feedback:
{{r|Nucleoside||:::::}}
{{r|Nucleotide||:::::}}
{{r|Lipoprotein||:::::}}
{{r|Critical pathway||:::::}}
{{r|Third molar||:::::}}
{{r|Transcendentalism||:::::}}
{{r|Hardy–Weinberg principle||:::::}}
{{r|Sleep initiation and maintenance disorders||:::::}}
{{r|Hypertensive urgency||:::::}}
{{r|Aldosterone antagonist||:::::}}
{{r|Team-based learning||:::::}}
{{r|Agile software development||:::::}}
{{r|Alpha adrenergic blocker||:::::}}
{{r|British Doctors Aspirin Trial||:::::}}
{{r|Health Professionals Follow-up Study||:::::}}
{{r|Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation||:::::}}
{{r|Autoimmune polyendocrinopathy||:::::}}
{{r|Bacteriuria||:::::}}
{{r|Janus kinase||:::::}}
{{r|Serum osmolality||:::::}}
{{r|Vena cava filter||:::::}}
{{r|Rifampin||:::::}}
{{r|Patient discharge||:::::}}
{{r|Nephrotic syndrome||:::::}}
{{r|Hyponatremia||:::::}}
{{r|American Heart Association||:::::}}
{{r|Craniocerebral trauma||:::::}}
{{r|Palpitation||:::::}}
{{r|Apolipoprotein||:::::}}


==Cereals Template==
{{r|Respiratory failure||:::::}}
{{r|Antiphospholipid syndrome||:::::}}
{{r|Intravenous infusion||:::::}}
{{r|Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C19||:::::}}
{{r|Chronic fatigue syndrome||:::::}}
{{r|Human Immunodeficiency Virus||:::::}}
{{r|Sick sinus syndrome||:::::}}
{{r|Microscopic polyangiitis||:::::}}
{{r|Queckenstedt's maneuver||:::::}}
{{r|Mechanical ventilator||:::::}}
{{r|Dysphagia||:::::}}
{{r|Natriuretic peptide||:::::}}
{{r|Ideal body weight||:::::}}
{{r|Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging||:::::}}
{{r|Reserpine||:::::}}
{{r|Thrombophilia||:::::}}
{{r|Spontaneous abortion||:::::}}
{{r|Protein S||:::::}}
{{r|Thrombophilia||:::::}}
{{r|Zygapophyseal joint||:::::}}
{{r|Opiate dependence||:::::}}
{{r|Vertebra||:::::}}
{{r|Tramadol||:::::}}
{{r|Pre-eclampsia||:::::}}
{{r|Urinary retention||:::::}}
{{r|Pheochromocytoma||:::::}}
{{r|Glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors||:::::}}
{{r|Veterinary medicine||:::::}}
{{r|Polymyalgia rheumatica||:::::}}
{{r|Principal components analysis||:::::}}
{{r|GTP-binding protein||:::::}}
{{r|Intracranial hemorrhage||:::::}}
{{r|Adderall||:::::}}
{{r|Habitual abortion||:::::}}
{{r|Diagnostic error||:::::}}


Thanks The gif image is working well now in the cereals template. All the dopey glitecvhes in wheat are now fixed
::::--[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 13:55, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
thanks Dave [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 00:03, 3 January 2007 (CST)
Daniel i think your solution of hiding things looks great.  Milt does this satisfy you? I admit the templates are a pain it is important to have some kind of visual reminder that there is an incompatibility between the metadata and the article. Hopefully they are more subtle now. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 23:09, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


== Wheat ==
:That's great, Daniel!  Many thanks for getting rid of all of the baloney!  I just created [[John Dickson Carr]] to test your changes and everything is terrific except ONE thing: I foresee BIG problems ahead if you leave things exactly as they now are.  Once one has created the article and saved it, on top of the article one sees something like '''needs metadate''' and '''show'''.  If one clicks on the '''metadata''' link, one is directed to the page '''explaining''' metadata.  I will bet you that *some* people will try to put their metadata into the template shown on that page!  My suggestion: change the wording to '''what metadata means''' and '''go here to add metadata for this particular article'''.  Thanks! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 23:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


Chris, could you kindly look at wheat, when you have a chance? It is nearing approval. Thanks. [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 09:03, 3 January 2007 (CST)
::Chris, I'll comment after I next create a new article ... which I hope will be a few days from now. Thanks, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 08:49, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


==Main Template==
:::Ad Hayford, I changed the phrasing to avoid that kind of confusion.


I wrote the main template the way I did in order to get something up there, because red template links everywhere looked ugly.  So if you want to improve on it, go for it!  The primary purpose for pipelinks there is to make the names make more sense.  "Please see our article on '''subtopic (topic)''' isn't as pretty, but that's not a crucial feature.  Thanks for your help! --[[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] 13:51, 25 January 2007 (CST)
:::Ad Milt, proper functioning of the templates can also be validated by putting the subpages template on any of the articles in the long list I prepared above.
:No problem, I'll play with it then, I just wanted to make sure I was not stepping on toes.  I think you make a good point with respect to the '''subtopic (topic)'''. i see another user has shown interest in the template too so we should be able to work it out together. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 13:54, 25 January 2007 (CST)


==Edits to Approved articles==
:::--[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:43, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
YEs you're right about my abilities on editing. With Biology I took the initiative to clean up some minor glitches that were passing by uncorrected, and I was mindful of the surge in usage and pageviews that we are experiencing. My approach has been to leave overt electronic traces of my actions so that they are transparent.
BTW
A Google Image search of 'PLoS Biology' provides images galore, including better images of bacteria than we have been using.[[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 14:35, 25 January 2007 (CST)
: yes I liked Biology 1.2 and found one redundant word in last sentance if i recall correctly [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 01:10, 26 January 2007 (CST)


==Recent Image Uploads==
::::Thanks, Daniel, that's a lot better!  Now one last thing.  When you click on the '''show''' button and are taken to the next page, you are shown some info at the top of the page BUT there is then a LARGE blank space beneath that info, so that unless you KNOW that you should scroll down to the bottom of the page, you won't know that you SHOULD scroll down in order to click on the "fill out the metadata" link etc.  I'm sure that many people would go to this page, simply look at the top of it, wonder what the hell they were doing there, and then leave, *without* filling out any of the metadata. Can't you get rid of this useless blank space? [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 16:32, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Can you try to provide more info when you upload pictures?  It's not enough to say "from Wikimedia commons".  We need to know the license of the picture and where it came from.  If you could at least include a hyperlink to the appropriate commons page, that'd be appreciated. --[[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] 14:29, 26 January 2007 (CST)
:Oops my bad, i was going to go back and do it at my leasure, as well as writing a more detailed descritpion. Thanks for doing the leg work for me!! [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 15:26, 26 January 2007 (CST)
:No Problem! -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] 15:56, 26 January 2007 (CST)


==Pictures==
:::::Done. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:17, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


<div class="thumb tright" style="background-color: #f9f9f9; border: 1px solid #CCCCCC; margin:0.5em;">
::::::Great!  I'll have to create another new article (sigh) to check things out one last time.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 22:40, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
{| border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="font-size: 85%; border: 1px solid #CCCCCC; margin: 0.3em;"
|valign=top style="background-color: black"|[[Image:A single white feather closeup.jpg|64px]][[Image:Morning_Glory_Pool2.jpg|115px]][[Image:Amanita muscaria tyndrum.jpg|71px]]
|[[Image:Mariposa Grove Squoias.JPG|86px]]
|-
|style="background-color: black" rowspan=4|[[Image:As08-16-2593.jpg|250px]]
|-
|[[Image:KildLaughing.jpg|86px]]
|-
|[[Image:Misc pollen.jpg|86px]]
|-
|valign=top rowspan=2 style="background-color: black"|[[Image:LightRefractsOf_comb-rows_of_ctenophore_Mertensia_ovum.jpg|86px]]
|-
|valign=bottom style="background-color: black"|[[Image:Kleiner Fuchs (Nymphalis urticae).jpg|117px]][[Image:Serengeti Lion Running1.jpg|132px]]
|}
<div style="border: none; width:335px;"><div class="thumbcaption">Biology studies the variety of life</div></div></div>


This is quite a tricky manoever ! [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 16:20, 26 January 2007 (CST)
:::::::Daniel and Chris: I just created a new article, [[Crude oil desalter]], and I must agree that the changes made in all those pop-up alerts is a great improvement over what they were before I started this discussion. Thanks to all. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 05:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


You think it is too complicated? i could just stitch them together as one jpg. Does it look a mess in your browser or do they all align tightly? The potential incompatability with different browsers might be a stumbling block unless there is some code tweeking that will work to fix it in firefox (at least). Looks good on my Safari browser though. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 16:30, 26 January 2007 (CST)
::::::::That seems just about perfect, Daniel, at least given all the previous template stuff that you have to work with. I just created [[Philip Atlee]] and have a one *minor* suggestion. When the main article has been created, we now have a header in black that says something like "The metadata is missing; if you feeling like doing it, please create it; details" then there's a blue link that says SHOW.  I suggest that you rewrite the longer stuff to say something like, "The metadata is missing; if you feel up to creating it, please click on the SHOW link to the right" and REMOVE the word "details" -- it's *slightly* confusing.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 23:31, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


::::::::: Good suggestion. I made the change. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 23:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


Waatchout. Might be good to give file new file names as the images on the approved biology artivcle look shocking on my browser at the moment [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 21:10, 26 January 2007 (CST)
::::::::::Peter, that's perfect!  Kudos to you and Daniel. I really think that there is now going to be a '''lot''' less confusion! In fact, I'll drink to that! (Goes off to make a Scotch and soda....) [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 01:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


== Moving ==


Just hold 5 min Im fixing to approved copy [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 21:16, 26 January 2007 (CST)
Hi Chris. From what I can tell, you've been trying to clean up a few articles and put pages in their proper places recently. I noticed that this has resulted in a [[Loyalists (United Kingdom)/Bibliography|bibliography]] and [[Loyalists (United Kingdom)/External Links|external links]] page attached to an article about a different subject.


::I don't think the file names are the problem but rather the coding of the table that makes up the montage.  I can't trouble shoot on my MAC at present until i download a browser where i can recreate the problem.  Good idea to comment out the table.  I would be fine if you deleted it too., i have a copy here on my talk page to play with. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 14:21, 27 January 2007 (CST)
As I'm merely a lowly 'author', I don't think I am allowed to move pages. I thought about cutting and pasting, but then I thought it might be better if the pages were moved properly.. so I thought I'd drop you a wee note.
:: The Biology image issue was a learning experience. My comments just above were made while I was  nearly panicking in the middle of doing some approval stuff with things going wrong ALL over the place. Now that things have quietened down, and I'm moving along with welcoming new arrivals I noticed that you did the honours when I arrived, and I'm now really seeing the value in a helping hand to people who are a bit lost at the start. At that time I had very little idea of why people were usking about my userpage cos I didnt even knoe I had one (not having used one much at WP. Thanks. Maybe some thought can even be given to expanding the welcome template to be even more helpful ? Maybe not?
:: Possibly you didn't pick up on it (or have discussed it somewhere I missed), but the reloads you kindly and appropriatly made of images (typhoid) for [[Biology/Draft]] caused problems in the then approved Biology version. We need to highlight procedures for image re-upload - a warning to check if some uses of the existing figure lack thumbs perhaps on the upload page? Or a Advisory to give a different file name like Finch2.jpg when it replaces smaller Finch1.jpg? A rule of thumb (!) to always use thumbs? Do you see my point?
:: Do you have any good advice about primary image size. If we exceed the suggested 150 odd k and always use small thumbs are bandwidth problems solved?
:: cheers [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 20:24, 28 January 2007 (CST)
:::Hi David,
:::*'''Welcome template:''' I just checked your talk page and sure enough I did help you a bit.  Bit of a lame welcome though, all business no play ;) A simple template might not be a bad idea. I think it would be good to include links to ''how-to get started'' sort of pages. Certainly we need a page that explains how to use all the wikicode, as well as some general advice such as pointing out the useful tools such as the ''what links here'' and ''user contributions'' in the navigation bar to the left. I can remember being completely lost when i first used a wiki and it would have been good to learn those trick earlier than later.
:::*'''Changing image; size issues:''' Now I understand your comments above.  I intially thought you were referring to the pictures in the montage. I now realise it was the knock on effect in the approved article with respect to the other figures you were refering too. I forgot that those figure changes would also be detrimental to the layout of the approved version, sorry to give you a panic attack. I'm still trying to get used to having two articles to consider (approved and draft). This type of conflict should not be a big issue in the future since the only reason those images in the biology article were coded that way was due to the fact that the imaging software (sizing) was not up and running in the early days here at CZ. Now it is fixed, the images should always have their sizes defined. With regard to size of the original picture.
:::*'''Changing image; bandwidth issues:''' I say upload the highest quality one available and obviously that is what i was doing.  I don't believe there are any bandwidth issues, although, Zach might have a better idea or at least know who to ask. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 02:28, 29 January 2007 (CST)


===Re Image fixed quest ===
The article the subpages belong to is, I believe, [[United Empire Loyalists]].
Ooo yes, it does look good now. I'm running Firefox 2.x in a Windows WP home environment now. I can check in in Windows explorer too. This is THE way to run browser checks! wiki checking.  [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 14:58, 29 January 2007 (CST)
:OK in that case I'll extend the change into the draft version. Then at least you have the code for the next update. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 15:04, 29 January 2007 (CST)


: Good thinking Bullwinkle. (:0). On IE 7 on the same machine there is just a tiny white gap under the Big Earth picture tho. [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 15:11, 29 January 2007 (CST)
Cheers (and sorry for adding to your workload!). --[[User:Mal McKee|Mal McKee]] 03:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


::  On my IE7, montage in approved [[Biology]] appears ''without'' gaps, and otherwise looks good, too. Could extend image horizontally with additional lifeforms. --[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] [[User talk:Anthony Sebastian|(Talk)]] 17:18, 29 January 2007 (CST)
: I moved the two files. By the way: There are no "lowly" authors. You could have made the move yourself. (You are only asked to be carful, of course.) --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 10:06, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
:::Anthony, check out the other good picture here. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Daycd  Or make requests.  I can easily add more or switch picture in and out. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 17:50, 29 January 2007 (CST)


:Personally, I'm not having issues with the image (Safari 2 and Konqueror), but I sort of feel like it might be worth looking into just linking a fixed montage image to a gallery if possible, or else using an [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Imagemap ImageMap] of some kind.  I mean, I feel like this issue is solvable, but browsers change over time, and we also need a solution that's implementable in other articles.  Both of those require some work on the backend, but then again, so does this.  -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] 18:14, 29 January 2007 (CST)
== Chris, or someone else who knows what s/he's doing... ==
[[Image:Montage2.jpg|right]]
::::Hey Zach, this is an excellent idea.  It will solve the compatability issues while still allowing the images to be accessible.  I'll get started on it. First I'll have to figure out what image map is all about but the example they showed was very effective.  In the short term, using an gallery will work very well. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 12:21, 30 January 2007 (CST)
:::::We would have to install an extension.  It's doable.  If you decide to go for it, email [mailto:bugs@citizendium.org bugs@citizendium.org] and I'll get it on the list of things to do.  -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] 12:33, 30 January 2007 (CST)
::::::Another use that will be much more practical is for metabolic pathway diagrams.  It will be excellent to be able to click on different metabolites and then be pointed to the CZ page about that molecule.  Interactive figures could work really well for the project and we really should do it in the future. I'll e-mail them, although, I would not consider it a priority at this point. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 12:38, 30 January 2007 (CST)
:::Chris: In [[Biology]], the large blank space between the open image (montage) and the 'table of contents' could accommodate leftward additions, strengthening ilustration of the "variety of lifeforms" concept. I like most of the images in the 'commons' link you gave above.  Especially the gaping feline.  Beyond my techability to help, however. --[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] [[User talk:Anthony Sebastian|(Talk)]] 21:28, 29 January 2007 (CST)


::::I can incorporate some more to the left if people don't think it looks cluttered. I'll put together some options and incorporate in Zach's idea of a gallery or image map functionality. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 12:21, 30 January 2007 (CST)
...could I prevail upon you to do the archiving thing with the [[CZ:Monthly Write-a-Thon|January Write-a-Thon]] and leave me a blank page for February?  Thanks! [[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 03:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


:::: Read  your other notes Chris I understand in general whats going on and agree for the moment (weeks, months?) we should revert the montage to a fixed jpg. This has been a good learning experience, and the Imagemap extension for things like metabolic pathways seems a good idea. Have fun wth the images . Love the ?Yellowstone pool. Need it in orins of life or whereever [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 14:01, 30 January 2007 (CST)
== More on metadata ==


:::::Just added a new version of the montage extending some pictures out to the left. I also added the gaping feline and replaced the running lion with a dolphin. Possibly a fish would be more appropriate since mammals are already well represented? I'm a bit worried that adding more begins to make it look more cluttered. If others agree which should go?  If you like this new montage but don't like one of the pictures which would you like replaced and with what?  We have many other photos at wikimedia commons that could be used to substitute these examples. Thanks for any feedback.  [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 01:31, 31 January 2007 (CST)
I'm sorry to throw the proverbial spanner, boys, but this didn't occur to me before.
::::::::Ooooooooh. A thing of beauty is a joy forever [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 01:59, 31 January 2007 (CST) aka Milton. Bugs in space yo.  I like that! [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 02:00, 31 January 2007 (CST)
:::::::::OK so it sounds like we can stick with this ;) Obviously this is a very small version.  I'll make a bigger version for the actual biology article. Then I'll make a gallery for the pictures with a more detailed description of each photo. re: bugs in space, i really was thinking that when i placed it there.  i thought the krills compound eye would make a nice moon too, or is that a death star? [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 02:04, 31 January 2007 (CST)


==Other pictures==
I have only just created a new article since the (excellent, I may add) changes to the setup.


[[Image:GEM_corn.jpg|100px]]
Could I just ask, if it's possible, for the 'create a metadata page if you feel up to it' notice box thingy to appear *after* a body has 'saved' the new article, not before?  At present it appears if you "preview". Now, if you click through to metadata creation on a "preview" page, you have to remember to '''go back and 'save' the original, ''or all your hard work is lost!''
[[Image:E coli at 10000x, original.jpg|100px]]
[[Image:Daphnia_pulex.png|100px]]
[[Image:Salmonella typhimurium.png|100px]]
[[Image:Bottlenose Dolphin KSC04pd0178.jpg|100px]]


[[Image:Plagiomnium_affine_laminazellen.jpeg|100px]]
I haven't (yet) tried it the other way, so I don't know what appears if you ignore the 'create metadata' bit and just click 'save' first.
[[Image:MEF_microfilaments.jpg|100px]]
[[Image:Chlamydomanas reinhardtii Flagella 3 - TEM.jpg|100px]]
[[Image:Drosophilidae_compound_eye_.jpg|100px]]
[[Image:Chick05.jpg|100px]]


[[Image:Krilleyekils.jpg|100px]]
[[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 01:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
[[Image:Oeil.png|100px]]
[[Image:Cwall99_lg.jpg|100px]]
[[Image:Navicula_bullata_-_Haeckel.jpg|100px]]
[[Image:Tigergebiss.jpg|80px]]


[[Image:Lightmatter peacock tailfeathers closeup.jpg|100px]]
:You write: "Could I just ask, if it's possible, for the 'create a metadata page if you feel up to it' notice box thingy to appear *after* a body has 'saved' the new article, not before?". I'm not sure I understand this exactly. How do you normally start a new article? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 04:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
[[Image:Pfau imponierend.jpg|100px]]
::This problem/request was not related to the "Who's on First?" metadata problem, right? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 04:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
[[Image:Frogspawn_closeup.jpg|100px]]
[[Image:Salmo_trutta.jpg|80px]]


[[Image:Airedale_terrier_744.jpg|100px]]
:::Chris, I think I recognize Aleta's concern. Once the subpages template goes into a new article, "preview article" brings up the metadata prompts. From bitter experience, if I write a new article of any appreciable length, I make sure to save before inserting the template. It's not hard to get lost in the prompts, decide not to fill them in, but neglect to save and thus lose the work. --[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 05:11, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
[[Image:Texas_longhorn.jpg|100px]]
[[Image:SalersBreed_Cow_2.JPG |100px]]
[[Image:HighlandCow.01.jpg |100px]]
[[Image:German_Pinscher.JPG |100px]]


[[Image:Damara_People_Namibia.jpg |100px]]
::::Now I understand, I never use preview so I have not been down that route. All I can suggest is bold letters saying '''first save your work'''. Would that be sufficient? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 05:13, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
[[Image:Mykonos_Market.jpg |100px]]
[[Image:Rhode_Island_Red.jpg |100px]]
[[Image:Cochin_miniatura_%28rasa_kur%29_u6.jpg|100px]]


==Re A N W in history logs==
::::: I just added a warning message to save. Hope it helps. However, one will never be able to prevent all mistakes. If there are too much warnings they will not be read anymore ... Probably one has to make one's mistakes, and learn from them. <br> Preview can be usefull. I sometimes use preview, and sometimes not. Sometimes I wished I would have used it instead of showing my stupidity in the history ;-) --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 10:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
[http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Biology/Draft&oldid=100025791]


I discovered what W in the history log means. It seems to be done automatically when you call on special WP templates
::::::Yes, Howard got it in one. I'm not as brave as you are, Chris, I almost always use 'preview', I look entirely too foolish otherwise.  Trust me, no one should see my 'scrap paper'! The down side, of course, is how many times I forget to actually 'save'--sigh [[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 10:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I used some code (including a command) specifying  small references and 2 columns from WP RNA interference article and the W appeared. [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 01:38, 31 January 2007 (CST)
::::::p.s. Chris, was the Who's on First metadata problem caused by my mistake in the ''status'' field?  Let's face it: I'm a genius! [[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 10:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Ooo luverly pix BTW.


On second thoughts the W appeared when I un-commented your montage code in Biology/Draft[[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 01:56, 31 January 2007 (CST)
::::::: Just a hint: If one has forgotten to save it is often still possible to go back to that edit page using the the browser's back button. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 12:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


It appears if the "Content is from Wikipedia" box is checked.  It seems to have starting defaulting to checked around the time you removed those comments. -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] ([[User_talk:ZachPruckowski|Talk]]) 10:58, 31 January 2007 (CST)
::::::::Er...yes, but when I say 'forgotten', I really mean it.  Like, I've shut down the computer, turned off the generator, taken the dogs for a walk, had my hair done (okay, that's a lie), made dinner...and then I come back next day wondering where that incredibly excellent 240 page cluster that I started is! [[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 22:15, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


== New Biology/draft montage ==
== The "Fair Use" upload summary ==


==montage==
Chris: In the last few days, I uploaded two logos by claiming Fair Use. They were the logos for [[ASTM International]] (ASTM) and for [[International Organization for Standardization]] (ISO). When I went to ''CZ:UPLOAD / I am not the copyright holder / This use of the work is Fair Use'', I arrived at the upload file form to be filled out. It has a '''one-line window''' in which to write the rationale for claiming Fair Use (i.e., the window labeled "Notes").
[[Image:Montage2.jpg|right]]
Hey, Anthony, is this the sort of thing you had in mind? [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 01:23, 31 January 2007 (CST)


*Chris, yes. Cool. Very nice. Do you make the montage's in PhotoShop?
Here is what I wrote as my rationale: "<font color=purple>The logo image is used to identify the International Organization for Standards. The significance of the logo is to help the reader identify the organization, assure the readers that they have reached the right article containing critical commentary about the organization, and illustrate the organization's intended branding message in a way that words alone could not convey. The entire logo is used to convey the meaning intended and avoid tarnishing or misrepresenting the intended image. The logo is of a size and resolution sufficient to maintain the quality intended by the organization, without being unnecessarily high resolution. Because it is a logo there is almost certainly no free equivalent. Any substitute that is not a derivative work would fail to convey the meaning intended, would tarnish or misrepresent its image, or would fail its purpose of identification or commentary.</font>"
*I know we can upload jpegs.  Can we download uploaded ones for editing?  Not that I want to edit your neat one, but for future reference. --[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] [[User talk:Anthony Sebastian|(Talk)]] 10:30, 31 January 2007 (CST)
**Hi Anthony, yes this montage was put together with photoshop, i have cropped some of the pictures (dolphin and plant cell) and rotated others (feather and daphnia). I am not sure on the restrictions with respect to editing. I assume rotating and cropping are fine. More creative uses I am not so sure about, I would guess it is OK.  This might be a good question to bring up on the forums. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 10:44, 1 February 2007 (CST)
That looks great!  Have you seen this [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Navigational_image wikimedia help page] on linking it to a gallery of some kind?  That is the current plan, right? -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] ([[User_talk:ZachPruckowski|Talk]]) 10:58, 31 January 2007 (CST)
:I have set up an initial (crude) gallery at [[Biology/Gallery]]. I will work on making it such that a click of the pciture sends to the gallery, the link you provided looks interesting. Thanks for your help, clearly there are many resources out there of which  I am ignorant. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 10:50, 1 February 2007 (CST)


It looks really great Chris [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 04:43, 2 February 2007 (CST)
It was very difficult to write all of that into a one-line window and to check it for spelling, grammar and omissions. Is there any way to revise that upload file form so that the "Notes" window is at least 6-8 lines wide?


==recruitment letter==
By the way, most of my above rationale was borrowed from WP ... because I could find no similar rationale help in CZ. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 04:27, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Could you help me with this? [[Citizendium_Pilot:Recruitment_Letter#Version_2_for_Biological_.2F_Health_Sciences| health science]] recruitment letter.
[[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 23:46, 31 January 2007 (CST)
:I'll take a look when I have time. I think the priority should be to target emeritus faculty. They might have more time and interest to pursue this project. By the way I am probably not the best for giving advice on the health sciences letter. I'm not sure I know what kind of language would sweeten the deal for a medically oriented editor. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 10:40, 1 February 2007 (CST)


==Wikimedia Templates==
:I made a reply ing the forum.  But in case you missed that.  For me, I use the upload primarily as a decision tree to get the correct templates. I often make changes and additions to them after the upload is complete.  In this case that might be the best way to go.  
Just looking at titles, all of those look pretty good.  We definitely need to get on top of those sorts of templates, and we need to make copyright identification as straightforward as possible.  I'll email the constables with a protection request for the GFDL.. -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] ([[User_talk:ZachPruckowski|Talk]]) 18:57, 1 February 2007 (CST)
:If you want to get rid of them, use <nowiki>{{Template:Speedydelete}}</nowiki>.  Make sure to sign it, and mention that it you created them and you were the only contributor. -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] ([[User_talk:ZachPruckowski|Talk]]) 00:54, 2 February 2007 (CST)


== Three Year Olds ==
:As to the technical suggestion of adding a larger edit window.  I would, if I could, but I'm not sure where to make such changes.  Or what to change.  Possibly Peter might have a better idea? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 04:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC) test


I don't know, three year olds can be pretty persistent.  And if you want to help with putting toddlers to bed on the forums, feel free. :-) -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] ([[User_talk:ZachPruckowski|Talk]]) 11:38, 2 February 2007 (CST)
== Thanks for getting the water freezing point straightened out (if it just stays that way). ==


P.S.  Something was wrong with your new message template.  I'm not sure if we support that specific syntax (the /w/index.php?whatever stuff).  It was throwing an odd message from 2 months ago.  I'll try to get someone to look into it - I suspect it has to be fixed over SSH.  -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] ([[User_talk:ZachPruckowski|Talk]]) 11:38, 2 February 2007 (CST)
Thanks, Chris. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 06:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


Strange, I just checked it on my system (MAC) and it worked no problem.  See edit [http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User_talk:Chris_day&diff=100027598&oldid=100027578 prior to this one] in the history. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 12:09, 2 February 2007 (CST)
==New template==
:Foreget above I just relaised you had already [http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User:Chris_day/newmessage&curid=100000320&diff=100027575&oldid=100002471 fixed it.] \. On the GNU templates I noticed there was some syntax that was not working for optional fields in the info box. i have not tried to figure it out yet.  In retrospect i will send that to the bug people to think about since it might cause problem down the road. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 12:14, 2 February 2007 (CST)
Hi, Chris. Thanks for your offer of further help (not that I can find it...)


== Thanks for help with the Domestic Animals Gallery ==
Can you make the '''unknown letter''' at [[Template:Common misspellings prolog]] show itself, please?


Chris, thanks so much for your continuing help with this! Nancy [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 16:36, 2 February 2007 (CST)
Ta! [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 17:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
:Lead by example and hopefully others will chip in. I was trying to find a good calico for the genetics article (X inactivation) but there were none of a high enough quality.  Also the sphinx cats look pretty cool and might be useful for an article on hair genetics. Likewise the Siamese will be useful for the concept of temperature sensitive mutations. So its all in a good cause :) [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 16:42, 2 February 2007 (CST)


==More on Templates==
: Where are you not seeing it?  [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 17:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
::I think I understand your point now.  It will not show on the template itself.  But look at the page where the template is used and you will see the correct letter there. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 17:50, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
That's what I thought I was doing - but anyway, it all seems to be fine now - thanks. [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 18:03, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


Well, I think the images issue is going to be tied to whether we "re-fork".  I mean, currently, if we don't get the WP articles back, we need our own template system.  But if we take the WP articles, we can inherit their template system and simply clean it up.  But before we can decide that, we need to figure out the license issue (if we're not GFDL, we can't re-import).  So essentially, '''we have two large policy issues to solve before we can look into the technical questions.'''  We also need a large tech team (as measured in expert-person-hours) overall.  -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] ([[User_talk:ZachPruckowski|Talk]]) 17:36, 2 February 2007 (CST)
== Pedia tricks ==


==Two ref columns in biology===
Thanks for following up on it! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 17:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
CODE used
<nowiki> ==References==
;Citations
<div class="references-small" style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
<references />
</div>
</nowiki>


I don't know what the moz -column- means.
== Categories, bots and templates ==
Could this be the source of Mac mozilla or Safari issues
Do CZ lack a Mozilla 2 column add on ?  [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 22:39, 2 February 2007 (CST)


==Comparison experimet==
Categories can be removed fairly easily by a bot. Let me know if that would be worth it (haven't found the page you use to track these). Also, could you please take a look at {{tl|Basic elemental def}}, perhaps in conjunction with [[User:Daniel Mietchen/Sandbox/Elements]]? I am thinking of prepopulating the empty pages via preload templates, but would appreciate some more input. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:23, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


This is an experiment to compare the last version of [http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Biology/Draft&diff=100028102&oldid=100028040 biology/draft vs biology approved]. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 11:39, 5 February 2007 (CST)
:If the bot can do that, great, although It might be tricky to program since it might not be able to predict every type of category or combination to remove? I just made an addition to your template.  Check it out on an element page and see what you think. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 19:48, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
: Wow! how did you do that. [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 13:40, 5 February 2007 (CST)
::Look at the numbers is the URL link.  Each one of the 9 digit numbers represents a specific edit in CZ. Comparisons can be done between any two edits, not just those on one page. Who would have thunk it? :) [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 13:43, 5 February 2007 (CST)


:: Thats pretty useful. Do you want to put it in the approval process for re-approved pages?. BTW some time soon, after a bit of discussion, we should think of approving the latest Biology/Draft.As you can see I picked up two more trivial typos. (One was a blank space, and I now realise where mystifying color diffs come from. We should air the double refs cols and your montage gallery. I think your new montage is a big plus, and if we put it up for approval soon, Ruth Ifsher will still remember how to do it. [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 13:56, 5 February 2007 (CST)
::The bot can in principle be given a list of applicable categories, or wildcards could be used in defining their names. No need to program for combinations &mdash; it will simply edit the same page again when working on the next category.
:::: PS I had a side email chat with Larry S about the '''A''' and '''N'''  tagging idea and he said hold till after some other programming stuff on the columns is finished [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 14:01, 5 February 2007 (CST)
::Thanks &mdash; the addition is valuable, but the current setting (not mine, by the way) is not compatible with {{tl|r}}:
:::::That may be moot, now that we have this ability to compare directly to the biology approved version. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 14:06, 5 February 2007 (CST)
{{r|Neptunium||:::}}
:::If she forgets that quickly I guess we must keep here busy. :) I have no idea about double column code and incompatability .  i am picking this up as I go along and that is out of my league.  i wish there was a source to explain all this wiki code.  i looked around on the web but nothing jumped out.
::--[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


:::As far as the ability to easily compare the latest draft to the latest approved, this seems, to me, like a must have tool. For me it is most important that it is an avalable option in the history of bioogy/draft. However, I like the idea of having it as an easy click in the approval template (i think this is wht you are suggesting above).  I wonder if there is an easy way to do it?  Manually cutting and pasting the numbers is a pain, although doable. Worse it is a bit esoteric, i bet the coders can somehow make it automatic.  Don't ask me how though. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 14:06, 5 February 2007 (CST)
:::Now I understand.  i thought you wanted to populate the element article pages but you're actually after a template to add the definition. I'll modify it as best i can, will probably have to have the definition pages <nowiki>{{BASEPAGENAME}}</nowiki> added as a parameter, ''i.e.'' <nowiki>{{Basic elemental def|Parameter}}</nowiki>, since it will not transclude properly otherwise. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 20:55, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


== WP template ==
::::I tweaked it enough now that i think it will work with the r template and also with a [[Ruthenium|lemma article]]. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 21:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Daniel, are you trying to modify the template so it will work for the "Hydrogen (element)" format?  I noticed that you had all those links on your page too. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 22:21, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


Try this. I think you just type ''WP|page name'' (or ''wikipeida|page name'', whatever you choose to call the template - in double curly brackets, of course)
: Daniel and Chris, I hope you do not mind, but I wonder if it would not be better -- and require the same (or even less) effort -- to create the definitions with a bot (using the same logic as in the template)? Or even manually copy the definitions from Daniel's page to the definitions? --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 23:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


{| align=center border=0 cellpadding=3 cellspacing=3 style="border: 1px solid #E0E0E0; background-color: #F8F8F8"
::I don't know for sure but I was thinking that Daniel might be planning to use a substitute script along those lines? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 00:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
|-
| style="font-size: 90%" | This page uses content from [http://www.wikipedia.org '''Wikipedia''']. The original article was at [http://en.wikipedia.org{{localurl:{{{1}}}}} '''{{{1}}}''']. The list of authors can be seen in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w{{localurl:{{{1}}}|action=history}} '''page history''']. The text of Wikipedia is available under the [[GNU Free Documentation License]].
|}


[[User:James F. Perry|James F. Perry]] 13:20, 5 February 2007 (CST)
:::I am not too eager on using a bot for just those 100 elemental definitions (too time-consuming, relatively speaking, to get it approved), so I thought I would create those pages by means of preload templates, similar to the [[CZ:Eduzendium]] course setup wizard. Ideally, there would be no piping (e.g. by integrating {{tl|Basic elemental def}} with {{tl|r}}.
:::I do plan, however, to set up a bot that creates lemma articles in place of empty pages for which a definition already exists.
:::On a related note, I am inclined to think that <nowiki>{{r|foo}}</nowiki> should also display [[Foobar/Definition]] if [[Foo]] redirects to [[Foobar]] and [[Foo/Definition]] does not exist. No idea how to make the template recognize a redirect page, though. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 18:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


:Thanks for the help, that workaround is a good solution. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 13:30, 5 February 2007 (CST)
::::As for [[Hydrogen]] vs. [[Hydrogen (element)]], I would prefer the latter to be applied throughout, but think that would be up to the chemists to decide. My idea was just to prepare the templates such that a coherent system can be easily achieved. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 18:46, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


I think using (element) is not a bad idea, but I'm not a chemist.


Test <nowiki>{{wikipedia}}</nowiki>
As for <nowiki>{{r|foo}}</nowiki> using foobar definition if there is a redirect from foo->foobar, I agree that might be good but I'm not sure if it is possible to read the target if the redirect? You do know you can pipelink with the {{tl|R}} template?
{{wikipedia}}
With regard to populating the pages.  If you want to use all the subpages with the properties for each element they will have to be moved to the new name, ''i.e.'' [[Boron/Atomic number]] to [[Boron (element)/Atomic number]] if you do not want to have a parameter in the template. This could be done easily by moving every element along with all its subpages. I'll modify the {{tl|Basic elemental def}} template so it does not need a piped parameter. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 19:22, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


Test <nowiki>{{wikipedia|biology}}</nowiki>
: May I remind you that using single properties subpages is a disputed matter? --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 00:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
{{wikipedia|biology}}


::I'm aware of that.  So far, I am just asking questions of Daniel and tinkering with the template since I'm not 100% sure of what he is proposing. One thing I do think is important is to have a basic page for each element. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 02:04, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


==Approval RNA interference==
:::I am aware of that too, and it actually inspired me to have another look at the matter, thus prompting my tinkering with these templates. The point here, however, is to have a consistent format, which can be achieved by means of a template transclude predefined content onto the definition page, and it can easily be adapted to either the current system with multiple properties subpages or the discussed alternative with one centralized metadata-like page. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your RNAi edits
Ive put an approval template on [[RNA interference]], so its time to roll 7 day deadline. Lets try and get another one up. [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 23:58, 6 February 2007 (CST)


== vandals ==
::::On pipelinking, I am well aware of that too, but many non-bot starts of Related Articles pages are made by simply dumping in a list of related topics, formatted using {{tl|r}}, without much regard for which articles actually exist. So we often have the case described above that <nowiki>{{r|foo}}</nowiki> does not bring about a definition, even though one exists at <nowiki>[[foobar/Definition]]</nowiki>, when [[Foo]] is a redirect to [[Foobar]]. I am wondering whether this is the way it should be. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 00:37, 22 February 2010 (UTC)


I could use a hand right now [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]] | [[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]] 00:53, 9 February 2007 (CST)
(unindent) Not related to the chemistry stuff but well within the scope of this section: Can you please take another look at [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template%3ABot-created_related_article_subpage&diff=100643820&oldid=100616784 Template:Bot-created related article subpage], which I attempted to modify such that it accommodates Lemma articles? Example to play around with: [[Biomedical engineering]]. Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:53, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
:Daniel, looks good to me. What is your rationale that these need to be distinguished?  So we can fortify our navigation network with lemma related articles pages? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 17:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


== some bull ==
::Does not look good to me &mdash; [[:Category:Lemma Bot-created Related Articles subpages]] is full of articles which do have metadata. I suspect there is a problem with a wrongly placed pipe in the template or with the way I check for the presence of the Metadata page, but I couldn't figure out the details.
::The rationale for this distinction is that if there is no metadata, then the names of the categories at the page will be broken, since they are by default composed from the metadata. And yes, extension of the related articles grid is the purpose of the bot, which can be configured to work with lemmas too. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:12, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


they get persistent [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]] | [[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]] 01:19, 9 February 2007 (CST) my page is gone good by them :)
:::Strange.  I'll double check. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 20:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
::::[http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template%3ABot-created_related_article_subpage&diff=100643918&oldid=100643820 That] was it. Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


==User versus User redirect==
== Automated handling of content - doubts ==
Now I understand: The redirects were there originally, not put there by YOU KNOW WHO.!  [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 12:08, 9 February 2007 (CST) good to see you chris
:Nice to be back :)  [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 12:18, 9 February 2007 (CST)


==Re RNAi==
Sorry that I am negative. But I have serious reservations against any automatic handling of content.
There was no reason or intention to omit your edits and your comments are very welcome. Ill work through how to incorporate them. If you see an easy way please do it and tell me where the url pointer should go. Any clarity issues of course go right in if they make sense. [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 00:47, 10 February 2007 (CST). Ive looked at the logs and think what I did was to revert to the last copy I know Id done and conservatively byppased your edits in a hasty job. Possibly in my haste I was assuming that Chris little day was a vandal candidate at the time I did this. My main motive was to get a correct page displayed quickly. BTW send me an email when you get a chance from the same account you sent from before confirming why Chris Day is now being displayed from your user page, or tell me in that email what you think d . Your remarks of course are all diagnostic of the real Chris Day who obviously knows this topic .[[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 01:03, 10 February 2007 (CST)
Providing a standardized definition for the elements is rather easy
:Hi David, I just sent you an e-mail.  If you are referring to my signature, that has always been with a captital. I naively didn't think it would make a difference. Of course, we are now becoming acutely aware of the subtle differences that can make alarm bells ring. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 01:33, 10 February 2007 (CST)
(and in principle I like thinking of the logic behind such programs)
:: thanks for RNAi suggestions .Wow image man extraordinaire [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 17:36, 13 February 2007 (CST)
but I don't think that they are really useful.  
:::The way I see it there only two issues of substance and we are there. 1. Explicit attribution for first PLoS figure and fixing note [1] Ill do this.
Giving the atomic number in the definiton is trivial, but not very informative.
2. About three to four sentances to explain outcome such as histidinne methylation TGS plant compexities as your already questioned.
Some element specific information (about its importance, or some peculiar property, etc.) is much better.
Thanks again AS and CD [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 17:51, 13 February 2007 (CST)
Now, of course, the generated definition can alway be replaced.
::: Hey I'm now in my day job (its 14th Feb here) and can pass a casual eye between meetings back in time at your fine night job effort. This is so satisfying. Cheers [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 21:42, 13 February 2007 (CST)
-- but it is much more likely that a non-existing definition is provided
than that an existing one (correct though simplistic) is rewritten.


==DNA==
Concerning the idea to automatically convert all definitions without main page to lemma articles:
RE DNA of course that was just typed out to form a framework.  
I think there is a legitimate use for lemma articles (ask Howard), for definitions to redirects,
Its like a kite flying exercise.
but also for definitions without a page (only intended to be used in Related Articles).
To trigger the revision and corerection. Wade right in Im taking a nap afeter a long day. Just check every now and again for our friends the MOOVERRS [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 01:27, 12 February 2007 (CST)
The difference is that -- if the page does exist -- a link to that page will look correct
:You sleep? i have tried to get the terminology fixed, i.e.e base vs nucleotide etc.  Need to nail that early so we don't mispropagate throughout the article. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 01:29, 12 February 2007 (CST)
though it may be better to link to another page. This decision cannot be made by a bot.
(For the same reason I think that one also should be careful with redirects and only use them for "correct" titles.
but not to lead from incorrect titles to a correct one.)


The DNA article is originated from Wikipedia (including all pictures), so I don't think there should be any copyright issues.
--[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 00:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
[[User talk:Stefan von Berg|Stefan von Berg]][[User talk:Stefan von Berg|(Talk)]]
:Thats what i think.  So why don't we load the full size versions? I'll get started on a few. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 11:13, 12 February 2007 (CST)


== Chiropractic as quackery. ==
:I think I disagree with the first paragraph, while I am not sure I understand the second. But once we have a coherent template system, I wanted to bring the matter to the forums anyway. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:23, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


You said:
::The purpose of lemma articles is discussed in [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,3065.0.html this dedicated thread] at the Forums. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:53, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


''I think the key sentence above is the following: "If your opinion is documented and represents a major view of this concept of vertebral subluxation, and that view is not mentioned in the article or in its links, then the onus is on yourself to suggest the additions or changes, together with the requisite support documentation." Chris Day (Talk) 01:49, 12 February 2007 (CST)''
== About [[National Institute of Standards and Technology]] and metadata templates without provisions for subgroups ==


{{nocomplaints}}
Chris, the [[National Institute of Standards and Technology]] was written before there were any subgroups and the Metadata template specified only the Physics and the Chemistry workgroups. I added the Engineering workgroup.
:I'm not attempting to ban anyone, I even agree with you opinion. But seeing more of your rants and less of your work will be a problem if you want to hang around in the long term. You just need to get your hands dirty, i can't see that calling for a delisting is the way to go though. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 02:08, 12 February 2007 (CST)
::[[Chiropractic]] is a form of good massage and quack medicine. [[Vertebral subluxation]] is a bad article, that needs to be deleted. Re-edit, forgot to sign, --[[User:Mark Odegard|Mark Odegard]] 02:47, 12 February 2007 (CST).


== Advice on 'Life' ==
The was no place to add a subgroup, so I added sub1, sub2 and sub3 to the template. Then I specified Chemical Engineering as sub1.


Taking the '''Life''' article in its current draft, what would you like to see further developed or modified. I have much more in mind for this article, especially work on the later sections, but would like to consider the practicality of getting out a draft that qualifies for consideration of approval. --[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] [[User talk:Anthony Sebastian|(Talk)]] 14:58, 13 February 2007 (CST)
The bottom of the Main Article then listed the categories as Physics, Chemistry, Engineering and Chemical Engineering as it should. The [[National Institute of Standards and Technology]] shows up in the Physics and Chemistry <s>and Engineering</s> workgroups as it should do ... but I cannot get it to show up in the Engineering and Chemical Engineering subgroups despite twice making a null edit to the article's Talk page. Can you please get it to show up in the Engineering workgroup and the Chemical Engineering subgroup?


:: Priorities First emphasise finishing RNAi then Life and DNA in parallel for me [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 17:34, 13 February 2007 (CST)
There are a good many of the older articles that have metadata templates which don't have sub1, sub2 and sub3 in them ... so perhaps they should be added somehow. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 17:41, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
:Milt the null edit needs to be made to the article.  i just did that and it is now listed as you'd expect. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 18:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


:::David, when you get to '''Life''', let me know if you want me to develop anything. --[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] [[User talk:Anthony.Sebastian|(Talk)]] 21:19, 14 February 2007 (CST)
:As to the sub1-3 field holders, yes they were a fairly recent addition so many metadata pages will not have them. Possibly Daniel could add them with a bot? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 18:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


==observation==
== That's one false move for man ... ==
most people have a bio listed but you only have your papers.  also, could you list the groups you an author for? [[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 22:54, 13 February 2007 (CST)
:The papers are the best representation of my expertise. What else do you think I should put up? [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 23:32, 13 February 2007 (CST)


== The license templates ==
Chris, I think I understand that a page is placed in [[:Category:False Start Move]] when the metadata template is not completed, but can you explain how [[United States War Department]] shows up in that category when that page is only a redirect?  [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 18:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
:This is normally because it was in the false move category and then the  metadata gets cleaned up, thus it is out of the category.  Now the flaw in our system (auto placement of categories), the article is listed in the categories that exist when it was last edited. It should be removed from the category after a minor edit to the article. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 18:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


If you're having issues with red links that shouldn't be there, make sure you don't have any w: prefixes in your links.  I assume you're borrowing these licensing templates from meta.wikimedia.org, where that's a prefix for a English Wikipedia interwiki.  So keep an eye out for those, and thanks for copying those templates -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] ([[User_talk:ZachPruckowski|Talk]]) 14:51, 14 February 2007 (CST)
:I just looked into this a little more closely and it is actually due to it being on the talk page (See [[Talk:United_States_War_Department]]). Citizendium differs from other wiki's in that a talk page will show up on a category without the name space being listed.  BUT, sometimes you can distinguish this since it will be listed in the category under T. The reason we do this is that many of the housekeeping categories are placed on the talk page, so such categories do not have every entry starting with "Talk:". [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 19:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
:I have rewritten them to be used here so that is not the issue.  I am working on the red links article on creative commons is the most obvious one missing.  I'm thinking an outside link might be a better route. I'm still in a holding pattern with respect to which how best to do this. Any news on the licenses that will be supported by CZ? [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 15:27, 14 February 2007 (CST)
::Yeah, that's definitely the number one question we need answered right now. -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] ([[User_talk:ZachPruckowski|Talk]]) 15:58, 14 February 2007 (CST)


== redirects ==
::Ah-ha, I've got it.  Thanks for the clarification.  Any reason why I can't do a clean-up?  [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 19:06, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


Chris, this is my conversation so far
:::No reason, that is what you should do. The subpages template should be removed from that page as it does not work on talk pages of redirects. The talk page could be speedydeleted if it is empty too. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 20:51, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
:::Just to be clear, this is what you type "''' <nowiki>#REDIRECT [[Name Of Target Page]]</nowiki> '''" [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 14:21, 15 February 2007 (CST)
::::Trying to learn these things
:::::1) How to do bullets
:::::2) When 2 articles are written and you "move" one to the other (aka "redirect") what happens to the information written on both the article page of the one being used? and the information of the article page that is being moved to?  What about boh talk pages?
::::::Oh, I see.  Well, in this case you definitely want to make a redirect and not a move.  A move deletes the article that you're moving ''to,'' clears the way as it were.  I don't even think the system will let you do that, actually, unless you're a sysop.  Anyway, use that "#REDIRECT" code to redirect from [[platelets]] to [[platelet]], and then depending about how you feel about them, work in your two sentences from the former into the latter...or whatever.  This sort of merger of pages is not something the system is really set up to do.  You have to do it by hand.


::::::Eventually we'll have a complete "how to" guide here, or a full and deep set of links to the mediawiki documentation available at meta.wikimedia.org and mediawiki.org. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 14:18, 15 February 2007 (CST)
::::I've discovered that some Lemma articles are showing on this list. Any advice there?  [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 21:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


Please let me know about the talk pages and the wording when you go to the "move" tab while transferring a page - referring to the talk page.  It has a check box and I don't fully understand that yet. [[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 14:33, 15 February 2007 (CST)
:::::I just jogged [[Evolution of language]] and it got removed from the category.  I'm not sure why it was in there, looking at the history there is no clear reason. All I can imagine is that Daniel added the subpages template to start the lemma article before the he created the definition page. In that order there would be a false start category that would disappear with the creation of the definition subpage.  In such instances the article will always need to be jogged with a null edit or it will remain in the false start category, even though the category no longer appears on the page. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 21:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
:Not sure what you mean by wording. When you move an article, you have the option to move the talk page too. The reason for moving is to preserve the edit history. Otherwise there would be no reason not to cut n' paste. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 14:42, 15 February 2007 (CST)


How do you re-access the page with the redirect after it has been redirected?  for example, how would one go back and undo the [[platelets]] redirect since when you click the link you end up at [[platelet]].  For example, if someone wanted to undo a redirect to make a list of pages that they may be referring to. [[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 16:32, 15 February 2007 (CST)
::::::Correct guess on [[Evolution of language]], Chris. I did that on purpose to test how the {{tl|subpages}} machinery would react to this unusual order of page creation, and think we should somehow include this scenario into the phrasing of the warning messages, depending on whether a definition already exists or not. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


Note that after [[platelets]] to go to the platelet article there is a little blue link at the top of the page that allows your to go back to the '''platelets''' page. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 16:34, 15 February 2007 (CST)
Here's another quirk of the functionality: If a user creates a page all in one edit with a subpages template, the page will get categorized as "False Start Move" but it will not show up on [[:Category:False Start Move]].  It requires '''''two''''' edits to the article page before it will show on the category page. See [[Declaration of the United Nations]].  [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 22:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


== User Contributions - how to access when on their user page? ==
:So presumably an edit only uses categories that are already on the page. I wonder if that is the case with manually added categories? By the way, these are general issues with the wiki software. I think you'll find they exist on your in-house wiki, as well as wikipedia.  Obviously this is less of a problem when there are a lot of edits.  One of the advantages of having a ton of vandalism?? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 22:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


Hello, I think it would be very useful to have a tab when looking at someone's user's page to see their contributions.  What do you think?  Also, could you please give me the way of accessing a user's contributions (ie a web address where I can then copy in their user name to the end) to access their contributions page?  The only way I know of doing this now is by finding the link on the recent changes page.  Please post your reply in user talk page. I made a section for this under replies from other users. [[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 15:09, 15 February 2007 (CST)
:I just tried creating a page and adding the category manually.  In that case the edit does register correctly. So it is the auto-generated categories, only, that need the double kick. What a pain. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 22:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
:post here: http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User_talk:Thomas_E_Kelly&action=edit&section=9 when you get a chance.  I don't know how to work "shift+\ = |" well enough (see wikicode section on links in my talk page) to figure out how to insert this link in wikiformat. [[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 15:12, 15 February 2007 (CST)


== Sort Recent Changes Differently ==
==Wow==
Noticing changes that you and Howard made to the "Criticism of US foreign policy" article -- excellent idea to make military spending as a % of GDP; you guys are pros. Impressed.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 01:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)


Regular Recent changes in the project pages box --> Namespace --> user.
==Error correction/s==
There needs to be a better way of handling external complaints than going public with the emails on the Talk page. My suggestion is to leave the 'complaint' on the appropriate workgroup forum or forward the post to the appropriate mailing list. The workgroup mailing lists and workgroup forums are currently under-utilised. 01:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
:Sounds like a good idea. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 01:24, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
::There are no errors in the article btw. Listen is a totally different group/line-up to Obs-Tweedle. Noddy Holder as 'roadie' is referenced. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 01:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
:::Having no access to the images I can't comment further, however since my information was gleaned off Bill Bonham who played in the band Obs-Tweedle, I'm fairly confident his information is correct. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 04:20, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
::::Chris, I just spoke again to Bill Bonham who confirms the article I wrote as being correct. Bill Bonham knows Noddy Holder very well. You can visit Bill Bonham's MySpace site at http://www.myspace.com/quiffo . [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 08:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


Ok, now it lists the same users multiple times if they make multiple edits to their main page. Is there a way to sort that down further so that the repeated same name only appears once?
For what it's worth I uploaded the pictures [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,3072.msg27620.html#msg27620 on the messageboard]. For the record I don't doubt your sources. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 17:17, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
:::::Thanks Chris. Some of those newspaper clippings appear to have been taken from scans on the LedZeppelin.com forum thread called 'HOBBSTWEEDLE' (yes I know, an incorrect name by another poster) originally scanned by a guy in Birmingham called Chris. I was a part of that thread discussion on Obs-Tweedle. I might reuse some of those clippings for the Listen article, rather than the Obs-Tweedle article since they are two different bands. While it may have been possible Noddy Holder was roadie for Listen, my insertion of Robert Plant's quote was based on Plant's recollections which are referenced from ''Q'' magazine and repeated in subsequent newspapers, and from what I could gather from my interview with Bill Bonham in 2009, before I composed the article. On the quote about Bill Bonham playing keyboards with Hari Kari while Robert Plant was singing for Obs-Tweedle, here is an email response I received from Bill this morning: 'Yes I was in Hari Kari but when I was in Hari Kari was way after Terry Reid and Led Zep came out with there first album..  Obs-Tweedle split when I joined Terry Reid or some time after I left' He is clear he didn't join Hari Kari until after Obs-Tweedle folded. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 22:16, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


What I'm really trying to do is scan the new bios for anyone who writes that they are a qualified person to possibly become an editor.  Any ideas? Feel free to reply on your talk page please. [[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 19:25, 15 February 2007 (CST)
(Unindent) I don't know anything about the pros and cons of the info in this article or of the worth of the newspaper clippings -- I merely brought them to your attention.  But please review the CZ guidelines on what Wikipedia loves to kick around as Original Research.  Our own strictures are less rigid, but they *do* exist.  Larry, for instance, made it clear, when I first joined, that the fact that [[Robert A. Heinlein]] told me that one book or another was his best book could NOT be incorporated within the Heinlein article.  He encouraged me to write a Topic Informant article, however, ([[TI:Hayford Peirce/Heinlein]],) with this information in it, and a link to that article now appears at the top of the Heinlein Talk page ([[Talk:Robert A. Heinlein]]). It may be that some of the information in this article should be handled in the same manner.[[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 22:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
:Not sure there is anything better. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 19:41, 15 February 2007 (CST)
:This is not original research. The quote, which seems to have sparked that email, is referenced from a reliable published source (according to WP standards). External references are used throughout the article. There are no errors in the article. This appears to be a case of someone who confused Listen with Obs-Tweedle and/or dislikes the fact that Robert Plant referred to their idol Noddy Holder as a roadie. Nothing is 'made up' or unverifiable for this article. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 23:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


===Categories Recent Changes Sorting===
:: I do not see any reason to exclude "personal communications" (they are used in scientific literature, too). Why should a personal communication to an author be excluded (if labelled as such) when a source that cites a personal communication would be accepted? --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 16:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Hm... ok, how are we going to get the /drafts tagged with Biology Workgroup Categories so that when we do recent changes, we can see the /drafts ones as well on our list.  Eventually, there will be a lot more /draft pages and we'll want to see how those are changing.  Any ideas? feel free to reply here. [[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 00:23, 16 February 2007 (CST)
:You didn't notice that i had added <nowiki>[[Category:Biology Workgroup Draft]]</nowiki> to all the draft pages? For example, [http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Biology/Draft&diff=prev&oldid=100037950 see this edit]. I forsee that any time an article is approved part of the protocol for setting up the new draft page will be tagging it with this category as well as commenting out the other categories. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 00:33, 16 February 2007 (CST)
::i just wish that http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Special:Recentchangeslinked&target=Category%3ABiology_Workgroup could be combined with http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Special:Recentchangeslinked&target=Category%3ABiology_Workgroup_Draft .
:::And then I wish that http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Special:Recentchangeslinked&target=Category%3ABiology_Workgroup could be combined with http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Special:Recentchangeslinked&target=Category%3AHealth_Sciences_Workgroup.
::::And you combine multiple lists and so on. One could then monitor many interesting lists at once (ie biology, chemistry, health sciences, etc) without seeing any articles in other fields if they did not wanted. It would just reduce the clicks.  But this is a MASSIVE improvement on the system and I am extremely happy with all the work you've done.  Congrats and great job! [[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 00:58, 16 February 2007 (CST)


:::Need programmers to do it as far as i can tell. It is beyond the tools available to us, unless Zach knows a trick? [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 00:56, 16 February 2007 (CST)
::: Because the source citing it is deemed to have checked and certified it. ''Authors'' on CZ have no recognized authority to do that. I don't know whether ''editors'' do. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 17:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)


== Health Science Workgroup upgrade ==
== Talk:Quintile ==


Hello Chris,
Chris, this is a minor issue, but it could lead to establishing some general policy.
If you are ever bored, could you do something similar with the Health Sciences Workgroup page?  The current recent changes on the health sciences workgroup page doesn't show any articles.  When I have more time, i'll try to learn exactly what you did. Until them, I'm off to rock my heme test. [[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 22:27, 15 February 2007 (CST)
By accident, I noticed that you deleted [[Talk:Quintile]] (after copying part of it to [[Talk:Percentile]]).
:You rock.[[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 23:34, 15 February 2007 (CST)
I left it with the redirect because it is part of the history of this page, and it does not hurt if it remains there.
:: :) OK I think you're set. I think we are limited to the recent changes associated with one category only.  I would not recommend tagging talk pages so we can use a talk category to recent changes on talk pages.  Instead, I would recommend that you populate your watch list iwith the articles you are really keen to monitor.
(My tendency is to preserve as much history as possible, e.g., by blanking rather than deleting.)
::Alternatlively, we can ask the developers to do a watchlist-like function for every article in the workgroups "all articles" category.  This would have the advantage of only showing the most recent edit for a particular page along with showing talk page changes too. I'll send them an e-mail to ask if that is even possible. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 23:51, 15 February 2007 (CST)
--[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 16:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
::::::Yes, this would be very useful.  I think your wikiprograming will open the developers eyes to the problems of wikipedia's recent changes (aka how important this advantage will be over WP), as well as ways of improving your work. If we could only get all the Biological Workgroup articles and the Biological /drafts together.[[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 00:32, 16 February 2007 (CST)
:::::::I can't see an easy way of doing that other than using your own watchlist. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 00:35, 16 February 2007 (CST)
::::::::AND WE NEED TO ADVERTISE YOUR WORK and spread the word. [[User:Thomas E Kelly|-Tom Kelly]] [[User talk:Thomas E Kelly|(Talk)]] 00:33, 16 February 2007 (CST)
:::: You and Tom together are like Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. err. Well Coool [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 00:20, 16 February 2007 (CST)
:::::I just hope we don't get shot at the end. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 00:28, 16 February 2007 (CST)
==RNAi==
Studies of RNAi illustrate that the final stages in RNA directed modifications to gene activity can occur by several different mechanisms (illustrated in the figure). They can involve blocks to RNA syntheis -  that is, transcriptional gene silencing [TGS] -  or silencing resulting from mRNA degradation [PTGS]. The methyation of DNA  <ref>Wassenegger M ''et al.'' (1994) RNA-directed de novo methylation of genomic sequences in plants. Cell. 76:567-76. PMID 8313476</ref> or histones can be affected ( see PLoS for more discussion.)  


This is what I have can you slide it in please [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 03:59, 16 February 2007 (CST)
==Thank you!==
:Yes i'll do it this weekend.  You picked a good reference since Wasseneger was pretty much the first to show a definitive correlation between RNA and DNA. I'd like to link it to the centromere maintenance since it uses this mechanism to maintain the heterochromatic state. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 04:06, 16 February 2007 (CST)


== 'lo ==
Thank you for helping me to edit that list.
[[User:Nick Bagnall|Nick Bagnall]] 16:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)


Hi, and sorry that I missed your earlier message at my talk page -- as with David Tribe's own message, it appears to have been lost in a recent flood of emails from all over the shop. Nevertheless, thanks for your kindness. :) -- [[User:David Still|David Still]] 01:31, 17 February 2007 (CST)
== Copyedit to protected page ==


== workgroup subcategory ==
Hi Chris,


Hey Chris, I was thinking that a lot of the controversy that we will see will be related to "content issues" that should be handled at the editorial level.  We need a way for editors to "call for help" that is easy for them to do.  That way, maybe they can settle something before it gets out of hand and people start to say things that they can't take back later, in other words, escalate the battle that might result in at least one good editor getting blocked.  I am thinking particularly of the Scientific method article where two editors had a total disagreement about how the article should progress.  They waited for an editor from their workgroup to intervene, but there really was no way to alert others in the workgroup and it was slow and probably inefficient.
in {{tl|Community}}, can you please change the "Main Page" in
<pre>
|width=10% align=center style="background:#F5F5F5"|<small>[[Main Page]]</small>
</pre>
to "Welcome Page"?
Thanks!
--[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 18:43, 4 March 2010 (UTC)


I was thinking that perhaps another subcategory for the workgroups that identify articles that request help could be monitored by editors as they show up and they can go to help out.  Maybe a template for the top of the talk page?  What do you think? [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 07:57, 19 February 2007 (CST)
:Daniel, that was a cascading protect from kim's talk page.  I edited her page and it seems to have removed the protection on that template.  I'll change it though too. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 18:59, 4 March 2010 (UTC)


:What about the workgroup forums?  Isn't that supposed to be an informal place to outline these discussions? That seems to be one significant difference with wikipedia that we are not restricted to only use the article talk pages. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 10:20, 19 February 2007 (CST)
== CZ:Request Approved Article Copyedit ==


::Your right.  Especially after they are able to technically join the forums with the project. I wonder when that is going to happen? [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 11:39, 19 February 2007 (CST)
Chris, with Matt being AWOL for the past 10 days or so, the list of approved articles needing copy edits is growing. I have about 10 approved articles listed there myself. Can you fix those?


== U's ==
If you need a volunteer to do some of that work, either temporarily or permanently, I am available ... but I will need some tutoring on how to do it. Regards, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 19:49, 4 March 2010 (UTC)


Thanks for the [http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki/User_talk:D._Matt_Innis#Careful_with_the_U.27s.3F heads up]!  I restored and answered on his talk page. Let me know if there are any more.  [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 11:35, 19 February 2007 (CST)
:Thanks very much for your prompt response. There is still [[Chemical engineering]] where Meg Ireland corrected spelling of succesfully to successfully. Could you do that one as well? Thanks, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 21:06, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
::I think that was specific to the draft as it is not in the main article. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 21:22, 4 March 2010 (UTC)


:Matt, I have not been checking that hard.  i think the confusion was due to the fact that Steve had made signifgicant changes before pasting into CZ.  The assumption was that the one he originally pasted in was the WP version.  Thus, there appeared to be very few changes. I think one way to check for that in the future is too look at the first version and see if it has WP redlink images and templates etc on the bottom.  If not, there is a good chance it is significantly different. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 11:43, 19 February 2007 (CST)
== [[Intron]] ==


::Sounds good, I'll keep an eye out for that.  Meanwhile, if anyone else gets one zapped, just reassure them and send them my way.  Also, there is nothing that says that can't just [http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki/Citizendium_Pilot:Notice_Board grab it from WP again].  Although, I know how it feels to lose something that you worked all night on - even if it was just to change one sentence.  When you finally get it right, you hate to lose it!  [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 12:14, 19 February 2007 (CST)
Hi I found some new info about [[Intron]] but I wasn't sure if you wanted to include it in the article; currently it's in the sandbox [[User talk:Thomas Wright Sulcer/sandbox7]] plus some pictures and diagrams. Feel free to include it; I'm not a scientist, and I found that while I couldn't make much sense of the technical articles, when reporters explained it, I could grasp the basics.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 04:56, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


== still want this? ==
:Looks good Thomas. Feel free to paste it into the article. I can work on it there. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 20:06, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


[http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundation]  I protected it until you tell me otherwise [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 15:26, 19 February 2007 (CST)
::OK, thanks Chris, like I'm not a scientist and so it's cool that you can catch glitches which reporters make.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 00:42, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


Thanks for asking, I'd say delete it for now.  i transfered it here since it was linked to some of the copy right templates.  However, it might be better to link to their own web site than bothering to maintain an article. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 15:29, 19 February 2007 (CST)
== The [[:Image:Gasoline Fuel.jpg]] ==


:Okay, I'll delete it. Thanks![[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 17:11, 19 February 2007 (CST)
Chris, I don't know how you did it, but your merge of the two photos is very much better than my original one. Thanks very much. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 18:22, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


:When I cut out the gas pump I made sure the selection tool cut all the white out.  I merged the two images using the anti-alias option so the edges of the pump did not look too sharp. Third, I brightened up the pump to make it a little more striking. Glad you like the changes. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 20:09, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


==Biology/Draft==
== Intersection of cat adoption and tall tale? ==
There are some recent changes suggested at Biology/Draft about Anatomy versus Morphology (favouring Morphology). As far as I'm concerned its a minor issue either way, but the proponent is insistent, and I don't see why they cannot be included, unless they make confusion elsewhere. Have you any advice before another Approved version of Biology goes through? The is extensive discussion at the non-draft talk page. [[User:David Tribe|David Tribe]] 01:02, 20 February 2007 (CST)


We could consider naming the archive "Version1" rather than "Archive1" because it is feasible that we will have archives of talk pages that are not associtiated with the saved version. [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 18:58, 20 February 2007 (CST)
Tall tail?  
:So you think the talk page should be archived after every approved version? That  might be a good idea, although this might result in very short archives? Maybe it is best to not have the archives linked to each version but have a visible marker to mark the points in the discussion that each archive occurred.  Something along the lines of the following:
<div class="usermessage plainlinks">Discussion for [http://pilot.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Biology&oldid=100024148 Version 1.2] stopped here. Please continue further discussion under this break. </div>
:This would make it possible to associate the discussion with various versions without fragmenting the discussion into small packets. [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 19:13, 20 February 2007 (CST)
::That would work!  That way the history of the decisions will be related to the versions that are associated with them.  I know that Biology probably won't change much, but I can see how a controversial subject such as acupuncture or pseudoscience could end up going through some long discussions without making significant changes to the articles.  That would work. [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 19:30, 20 February 2007 (CST)


:::I moved [[Talk:Biology]] to [[Talk:Biology Archive 1]]. So far so good? [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 10:55, 21 February 2007 (CST)
(I am not making this up: Mr. Clark rejected tuna, wet disgusting cat food, and his expensive hypoallergenic dry cat food. He insisted on going upstairs into the general cat area, and into the bin of regular dry cat food -- in which he then went to sleep.) [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 19:10, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
::::It needs a slash.  The right place is [[Talk:Biology/Archive 1]].  Thanks.  -- [[User:ZachPruckowski|ZachPruckowski]] ([[User_talk:ZachPruckowski|Talk]]) 11:33, 21 February 2007 (CST)


:::::Okay, moved to [[Talk:Biology/Archive 1]]. Now okay? [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 11:42, 21 February 2007 (CST)
== [[2012]] ==
I'm kind of looking for a green light before working on "2012" -- not that I'm that interested in it, but wondering what the policy is and whether others here will support it. It's a hot article on WP even though it's kind of a stupid subject (futurism stuff) as well as a movie. Wondering if there's some kind of "approvals in advance" place to get permission for dubious articles.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 17:54, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


::::::So now we want to protect [[Talk:Biology/Archive 1]] against edits, right? [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 13:25, 21 February 2007 (CST)
:I really don't know much about it. But it would be no worse than an article about [[UFO]]'s or [[astrology]]. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 18:28, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
:::::::Rob got it! Now do we want a link to [[Talk:Biology/Archive 1]] from the [[Talk:Biology/Draft]] page? [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 13:51, 21 February 2007 (CST)


== Thanks Chris! ==
::OK, thanks, so you're saying if I write it, that you don't think I'll have problems with it. Thanx, Chris.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 18:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


Glad to be back! :-) [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 14:28, 20 February 2007 (CST)
:::I can't think of a reason why there would be a problem. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 18:44, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


== Elenchus on wheels ==
== Asking for your comments ==


Perhaps you can help me. Its seems that an article I wrote, [[elenchus]], has been deleted (although its talk page is still there). I think a vandal changed it to [[elenchus on wheels]] (I say 'changed' because this article suddenly appeared on my watchlist), which you have rightly nominated for deletion. Any idea? [[User:Damien Storey|Damien Storey]] 03:23, 21 February 2007 (CST)
Chris, would you look at the "Nitrogen cycle" section of the [[Air]] article ... and make any revisions you think are needed? Thanks, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 19:30, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


Found and restored I hope[[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 06:06, 21 February 2007 (CST)
== Can you improve [[:Image:Venturi Tube.png]] ? ==


== Deleting redirection pages ==
Chris, the only drawing program I have is Microsoft's Paint program that is included with Windows XP. As you can see in [[:Image:Venturi Tube.png]], the lines that are not horizontal or vertical (that is, the angled lines) are quite "jagged". Does your program create angled lines that are not jagged? If so, could you replace the jagged lines in [[:Image:Venturi Tube.png]] with lines that are not jagged? It would greatly improve that image. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 05:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


A lot of redirection pages are useful, and we shouldn't delete them if doing so will break a link.  If X links to Y which redirects to Z, then to delete Y will both make the link on X turn red (and possibly cause someone to write a new article titled Y) and possibly orphan Z. So...I hope you checked to make sure all the redirection pages you deleted were in fact orphans themselves. Or, you can make a redirection page an orphan by pointing X directly at Z. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 08:15, 21 February 2007 (CST)
:Milt, there are multiple free graphics packages out there that far exceed the capabilities of MS Pain(t) &mdash; to the point of being hypercomplex. Two that probably merit a look for diagrams like these are [http://www.openoffice.org/product/draw.html Open Office Draw] and [http://www.gimp.org/downloads/ Gimp]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 08:59, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


:Good point, I'm pretty sure they are all orphan. I have to admit i did not check all of them for double redirect potential and could not since the articles they were redirecting to were already gone. Is there an easy way to check if they are an X to Z possability? Where the redirect is X and the Y is the page deleted in the BSD? [[User:Chris day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris day|(Talk)]] 10:29, 21 February 2007 (CST)
::Thanks, Daniel. One of these days I will take the time to download one of those and learn how to use it. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 17:31, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


==Experimenting with archive box==
::Chris, thanks for fixing the Venturi image for me. It looks much better now. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 17:31, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


{{Archive box}}
== Your talk at the New Communication Channels for Biology Workshop 2008 ==


|
Hi Chris,
[[/Archive 1]],
can you send me your slides from [http://ccbw.calit2.net/video.html that workshop], or put them online? They may be useful for drafting the [[User:Daniel Mietchen/Sandbox/Open Knowledge Conference 2010/|OKCon 2010 paper]]. Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 18:38, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
[[/Archive 2]],
 
[[/December 2005 - January 2006]] and
:Wow, i'd forgotten about that.  <s>I'll root them out.</s> Just looked on this computer and no sign, it must still be on my semi-dead (screen is broken) lap top.  I'll boot it up tomorrow and see if i can find anthing on its hard drive.  [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 03:17, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
[[/Deletion discussion]]}}
 
::Thanks! I put the slides up [http://docs.google.com/present/embed?id=ddwhqd6k_296csrfjmvg here] for everyone to work on. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:47, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 
== CC vs. PD ==
 
How, for Pete's sake (as some would say), can I upload (and correctly credit) an image directly [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template:Fractal-Trace-Gimp-Panton-Principles-Settings.png/credit&curid=100151124&diff=100652678&oldid=100652669 as PD]? The only option I saw to do so always leads to it being labeled as CC0-1.0, and at least in this set of three images (which shall serve to illustrate the [[Panton Principles]]), I do not want to have any name attached to it, because that is the message of these Principles. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 
:I just looked at the upload file link and it seems to be click on the "I am not the copyright holder" tab.  Then select the "in the public domain" option.  Then for the license select "creator has released into the public domain". Are you not seeing those options when you do the upload? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 14:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 
::I do, though this time I went there via "I am the copyright holder" and "Release into the Public Domain", which gave the CC0 attribution. I think the problem with the upload wizard is that Caesar left when he was mostly but not entirely done with it. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:19, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 
::[EC] OK, I just followed the "I am the copyright holder fork" and now I see how you got to "Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal License".  I guess that is equivalent to public domain? But this is beyond my ken. If Caesar was not done with it, possibly the PD license option should be at that point too? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 14:20, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 
:::The two are practically equivalent in the US but CC0 is more universal, since most jurisdictions do not have PD, but all have [[copyright law]]. Anyway, CC0 means that also no BY is needed. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 
::::I've just spent 10 frustrating minutes at [[:Image:Drink to Yesterday.jpg]] trying to '''"Upload a new version of this file"'''.  Can't be done.  All you can do is '''start all over again''' and upload another file under another name AND fill out all the @#$%^&* information that you had to do with the first one!  And unless you're maybe a combination of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, you can't '''"Edit this file using an exterior application"''' either.  Geez! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 00:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::That doesn't sound right.  Are you using the link titled "'''Upload a new version of this file'''"  just above the [[:Image:Drink_to_Yesterday.jpg#filelinks|Links]] section title. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 00:43, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::Yes. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 00:55, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::PS -- I use Chrome as my browser.  Could that be affecting things in some mysterious way? [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 01:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::If you choose the new file to upload and then save, leave everything else blank, then it will be fine.  You'll see. It will ask you if you want to ignore all warnings.  Select yes and then you're done. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 00:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::It keeps telling me that I need License info, and the license info isn't what I want.  And it won't work unless I choose a license.  No way. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 01:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::I just tried it, and it works fine with jpg, but when I use .png, I get "The file is corrupt or has an incorrect extension. Please check the file and upload again." --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 01:08, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::::It still doesn't work.  I have, on my computer, a *smaller* version of the present image.  It has the same name and is a .jpg.  A few minutes ago I had a slightly different name on it, but it was the same .jpg file. It doesn't matter *what* it's called.  No matter *what* I do, I am told that I MUST choose a license.  If I don't choose a license, it will NOT upload the file. Period. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 01:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::::I just tried and it worked fine. All I did was choose the new file on my desktop.  Then save. Then chose ignore all warnings.  That's it.  All the files data and licenses are intact. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 02:21, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::::::A box doesn't pop up and tell you that you have to choose a license? Do you have a Papal dispensation, or what? [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 03:48, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::::::No, I've never seen that and I've updated images at CZ quite a few times. [[User:Chris Day|Chris
Day]] 04:15, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::::::::Off to bed, but tomorrow I'll do a screen capture of the box I get and I'll email it to you. Don't know what else to do. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 04:43, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
== Space Invaders ==
 
Sorry, I thought I'd got the hang of new pages but apparently not. I've seen the changes you made and will follow the example when making futher pages. --[[User:Chris Key|Chris Key]] 00:29, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 
== Lemma formatting ==
 
What do you think of displaying the definition above the instructions in lemma articles? I just [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template:Lemma&curid=100091956&diff=100653055&oldid=100649850 did the switch] (also [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template:Def_only&curid=100147979&diff=100653048&oldid=100648088 this one]). --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:32, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
:Somehow, the definition pages do not display properly now, and I guess {{tl|subpages}} would have to be remodeled to accomodate the change I made. Do you think that's worth it? --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:50, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
::I reverted both changes and moved the testing to the test wiki: [http://test.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template:Lemma&curid=100091956&diff=100642057&oldid=100640610 Lemma], [http://test.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template:Def_only&curid=100147979&diff=100642056&oldid=100641506 Def only]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 01:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
:::Could not pinpoint exactly what the problem was, so I went back to normal for the time being. On a related note, what do you think of merging {{tl|Def only}} and {{tl|Lemma}}? --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::I would not be against that.  I'll have a look and see how it can be streamlined, or do you already have a plan? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 03:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::I do, but can't put it in words easily (other than moving the conditionals from {{tl|Def only}} to {{tl|Lemma}}). Will thus give it a go on the test wiki, and let you know how things go. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 07:32, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::I merged them and added some categories, which makes {{tl|Def only}}, [[:Category:Definition Only]] and [[:Category:Related Articles Only]] redundant. Please check and adapt as you see fit. Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 
Things work fine on the test wiki, but the display problem that started this thread
interfered when I did bring the changes over to the live wiki (where  {{tl|subpages}}
has not been updated yet.
So please transfer [http://test.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template:Subpages&curid=100021004&diff=100642170&oldid=100642169 this edit]
to {{tl|subpages}}
(possibly with [http://test.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template:Subpages&curid=100021004&diff=100642171&oldid=100642170 this typo correction])
and then [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template:Def_only&curid=100147979&diff=100664676&oldid=100664645 revert this edit].
Test clusters:
[[Special:PrefixIndex/Glia/|Glia]], [[Special:PrefixIndex/Open_Knowledge_Foundation/|Open Knowledge Foundation]].
Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 12:49, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
:Daniel, i made the change but is the definition page the way you intended? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 17:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
::Fixed and streamlined. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
:::Nice work Daniel, that's a big improvement. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 23:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 
== The section on "Nitrogen cycle" in the [[Air]] article ==
 
Chris, about two weeks ago I asked you to look at the section on "Nitrogen cycle" in the [[Air]] article and revise it in any way you felt was needed. I know you've been busy, but I would still appreciate your review as a biology editor of that that section. Thanks in advance. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 16:56, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 
:Hi Milton I looked at the [[Nitrogen cycle]] article and proposed a revamping here in a sandbox: [[User talk:Thomas Wright Sulcer/sandbox2]] I expanded it but I'm not a scientist or technically-minded like you or Chris so I'm deferring to your judgment. I'm finding my paint program doesn't work well, so I hand-drew a diagram, but still am unhappy with it. I'm wondering if there's a good paint program that is simple, powerful, works with Ubuntu Linux so I can do better quality stuff here.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 02:25, 27 March 201UTC)
 
::Thomas, my request of Chris was simply to take a look at the small section of the [[Air]] article that briefly describes the nitrogen cycle ... briefly on purpose.
 
::What you have written in your sandbox2 is a an expansion of the stub article on the [[Nitrogen cycle]] ... which I very much agree needs to be expanded, but which is out of my field of expertise. So I don't believe that I am really qualified to comment on your expansion of that stub article. I would suggest that, in addition to Chris Day who is a biology editor, you contact [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony Sebastian]] who is also a Biology editor and quite active. I would also point out that a very good drawing of the cycle is available in Wikimedia Commons [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nitrogen_Cycle.png] where it is designated as being in the public domain. Other good drawings can probably be found with a bit of Googling. Regards, 03:27, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Does Anthony Sebastian have the "Nitrogen cycle" article on his watchlist? If so he'll see a note I placed there. I did this article first so that I would be in a position to help you with the "Nitrogen cycle" section of the "Air" article. But I'm not an expert by any stretch either. Good idea to get the picture on Wikimedia Commons -- my drawing didn't come out as well as I had hoped, but I still have ''illusions'' of being an excellent CZ sketch artist!--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 14:27, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 
== False start move ==
 
Hi Chris,
I think [[:Category:False Start Move]] is overpopulated, and at least partly with what should rather be in [[:Category:Lemma Article]], e.g. pages like [[Citizen science/External Links]]. As far as I can tell, the culprit is the if nesting in {{tl|Subpages}}, so I can't fix it. Please check. Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:24, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
:Daniel, is this still a problem? There did not seem that many there or is that because you have processed them?  From what i could see they were mostly left over subpages or lemma like pages without a definition. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 18:06, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::I think I see what you mean, now that i have looked more closely at the example of [[Citizen science/External Links]]. At present the only lemma subpages supported are /Related Articles and /Definition. Are you suggesting that we should allow /External Links and /Bibliographies too? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 18:11, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Yes, and Video. In principle, I would like to have all subpages enabled for Lemmas. This allows to collect materials in the right place even though the article has not been written yet. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 18:34, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::I'll look at the coding and see if it is an easy fix or not. If so I'll do it as soon as possible. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 18:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::If you would unlock it over on the test wiki, I could join the coding. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::I have [http://test.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template:Subpages&curid=100021004&diff=100642130&oldid=100642129 changed] and tested it on the test wiki. Please transfer it here. Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::Thanks! My edit also contained a typo correction. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 08:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 
== Nomenclature for botany articles ==
 
Plant hormone or plant hormones or plant growth hormones?
 
*Auxin or auxins?
*Cytokinin or cytokinins?  The animal article is [[cytokines]].
* Gibberellin or giberellins?
 
*Tissue culture
**Plant tissue culture
 
I'm beginning to think I need to become your student... --[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 22:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::I've been his student for years...[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 03:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 
== Checklist22 ==
 
Hi Chris, please comment on [http://reid.citizendium.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47#c25 this], either there or here. Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:You just want to know about the test link?  That was a hyperlink to walk authors through a move cluster sequence. I did that by opular demand to try and make the process of moving a cluster more efficient and transparent.  It never really did serve the purpose as things got complicated if the article was moved before the metadata template. Since then, it got broken with a mediawiki update and i could not figure out a good work around.  I had forgotten it was still available as an option. We should probably just remove and delete all the templates associated with it. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 19:25, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::Thanks, fixed. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
==Please join with me in urging Hayford not to resign==
 
Chris, see my plea to Hayford not to resign as Constable (on his Talk page). Please join me! [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 20:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 
== Listing-defined references test ==
 
As of September 2009, the Cite.php extension was modified to support list-defined references. These can be implemented with the parameter to the {{tl|reflist}} template, or by using a pair of HTML tags (<code><nowiki><references></nowiki></code> and <code><nowiki></references></nowiki></code>) in place of the <code><nowiki><references/></nowiki></code> tag. These reduce clutter within articles, by putting all the citation details in the section at the end where the footnotes are displayed. As with other citation formats, these should not be added to articles that already have a stable referencing system, unless there is consensus to do so. When in doubt, use the referencing system added by the first major contributor to use a consistent style.
 
The example below shows what list-defined references look like in the edit box:<!--i.e. construed to look similar when viewed on the saved page. If you're actually IN edit mode it'll look different with the tags such as <tt> and <nowiki> used to make the construction work-->
<blockquote style="color:#999; background:white; padding:1em; border:1px solid DarkSeaGreen;">
<tt>
The Sun is pretty big,<span style="color:black;">'''&lt;ref name=Miller2005p23/>'''</span><br />
but the Moon is not so big.<span style="color:black;">'''&lt;ref name=Brown2006/>'''</span><br />
The Sun is also quite hot.<span style="color:black;">'''&lt;ref name=Miller2005p34/>'''</span><br />
<span style="color:#666;">&#61;=Notes==</span><br />
<span style="color:black;">'''<nowiki>{{reflist|refs=</nowiki>'''<br />
'''<nowiki><ref name=Miller2005p23></nowiki>'''Miller, E: <nowiki>''The Sun''</nowiki>, page 23. Academic Press, 2005.'''<nowiki></ref></nowiki>'''<br />
'''<nowiki><ref name=Miller2005p34></nowiki>'''Miller, E: <nowiki>''The Sun''</nowiki>, page 34. Academic Press, 2005.'''<nowiki></ref></nowiki>'''<br />
'''<nowiki><ref name=Brown2006></nowiki>'''Brown, R: "Size of the Moon", <nowiki>''Scientific American''</nowiki>, 51(78):46'''<nowiki></ref></nowiki>'''<br />
'''<nowiki>}}</nowiki>'''</span>
</tt>
</blockquote>
 
Below is how this would look in the article, once you had previewed or saved your edited section:
<blockquote style="background:white; padding:1em; border:1px solid #999;"><!--Edit mode note: the example display code uses some raw html to avoid clashing with other/real references and notes on this page.-->
The Sun is pretty big,<sup id="nbLDR01" class="reference">[[#noteLDR01|[1]]]</sup> but the Moon is not so big.<sup id="nbLDR02" class="reference">[[#noteLDR02|[2]]]</sup> The Sun is also quite hot.<sup id="nbLDR03" class="reference">[[#noteLDR03|[3]]]</sup>
<br /><br />
<font size=3><b>Notes</b></font>
----
<ol class="references">
<li id="noteLDR01"
><b>[[#nbLDR01|^]]</b> Miller, E: ''The Sun'', page 23. Academic Press, 2005.</li>
<li id="noteLDR02"
><b>[[#nbLDR02|^]]</b> Brown, R: "Size of the Moon", ''Scientific American'', 51(78):46.</li>
<li id="noteLDR03"
><b>[[#nbLDR03|^]]</b> Miller, E: ''The Sun'', page 34. Academic Press, 2005.</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
 
Defined references must be used within the body; unused references will show an error message. However, non-list-defined references (i.e. ordinary footnote references fully enclosed with <nowiki><ref> and </ref></nowiki> tags) will display as normal along with any list-defined ones.
 
----
 
The Sun is pretty big,<ref name=Miller2005p23/> but the Moon is not so big.<ref name=Brown2006/> The Sun is also quite hot.<ref name=Miller2005p34/>
 
{{reflist test|refs=
<ref name=Miller2005p23>Miller, E: ''The Sun'', page 23. Academic Press, 2005.</ref>
<ref name=Miller2005p34>Miller, E: ''The Sun'', page 34. Academic Press, 2005.</ref>
<ref name=Brown2006>'''Brown, R: "Size of the Moon", ''Scientific American'', 51(78):46</ref>}}
 
:Chris, I tried this because it is such a great improvement ... but I cannot get it to work. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 22:35, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 
::I tried it in my WP sandbox and it works perfectly. But the identical edit box coding does not work in my CZ sandbox. Has that Cite.php extension revision been implemented for CZ? It would greatly improvement the readability of edit boxes and make editing revisions, rewrites, etc. very much easier. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 23:36, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
:::I agree with you with regard to why we want this here. I'm assuming this does not work here at CZ,  I was testing it here. The text above might be confusing, it is a direct cut and paste from wikipedia. I'll ask Dan if he knows what to changes need to be made to the Cite.php exension here to make this workable.[[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 21:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 
== Categories for images ==
 
What do you think of letting images inherit the categories of the articles they are used in? I think this should not be too complicated &mdash; the code for this is all in the {{tl|subpages}} system, and images are placed via {{tl|image}}. The only problem I see is that imagemaps are currently not compatible with the latter. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:38, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 
:How would the categories be placed on the image page?  What is the mechanism for "inheriting" the categories from the articles they are placed in?
 
:As to the plan, it sounds like a good way to know what images are being used in each workgroup or subgroup. A problem I forsee in the future is that such categories are too broad.  A better way would be able to break them down further into groups of categories, i.e. pictures used in articles on "Biology AND Chemistry" or "Biology AND Chemistry AND Health Sciences" Would that be possible? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 21:15, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 
::The more I think about it, the less sure I am about the mechanism, at least with the currently installed extensions. My initial thought was that we would need an {{tl|images}} template on each image, which could then place categories much like the subpages system does. The problem is that there is just one place where the relevant information is stored in the subpages system, and unless we introduce some metadata system for images (which would probably not be a good idea), there will always be several such places for images used on more than one page. SemanticMediaWiki, however, may come to the rescue, so by the time we really need the feature, we may actually have it. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 
== Re-approval of [[Gasoline]] ==
 
Hi, Chris, I think that I have responded to the points raised by you and by Howard on [[Talk:Gasoline]]. Howard has asked for your help in how to do the re-approval nomination (see [[Talk:Gasoline]]). Would you please help him? Thanks, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 20:45, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 
== " Nitrogen cycle" section of [[Air]] ==
 
Chris, I noted your very recent edits of [[Nitrogen cycle]]. I would much appreciate your looking at the "Nitrogen cycle" section of the [[Air]] article and correcting/revising/whatever you believe is needed. Thanks, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 00:08, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 
== Better use of subgroups? ==
 
As you may have noticed, I've been creating quite a few subgroups (e.g., the specialties of internal medicine, veterinary medicine), assorted computing topics, etc. In general, I conceived each subgroup as highly correlated with a mailing list, professional organization, or some other recruitment target.
 
If they are to be a recruiting and work planning tool, would it be possible to display the article status in the list of articles for the group, rather like rpl? [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 06:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 
:It also might be useful to display the list of subgroups from a link on the left, just as we do for workgroups. Someone else probably has to do that.
 
:The Subgroups article seems to suggest there can be subgroups of subgroups, but doesn't explain the syntax.  Here would be an example:
:*CZ Internet applications subgroup
:**CZ World Wide Web subgroup
:**CZ Electronic mail subgroup
:**CZ Distributed computing subgroup
 
--[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 15:12, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
   
: As I have already said elsewhere: The idea of workgroups, subgroups, and potential subsubgroups should not be used as a substitute for a good subject classification (we will need one!). Unless there are at least three (better more) authors interested a "group" makes no sense. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 15:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 
::I'm not suggesting these as a substitute for classification. I'm suggesting these as preparing for an agreed-to recruiting campaign just to get such members, for which we clearly don't have enough current Citizens. For example, [[CZ: Internet operations]] is the specific goal of the North American Network Operators Group, which has a mailing list to which I subscribe and at which I've been active.  If I send a mail to the list soliciting membership, including a pointer to the subgroup gives potential Citizens an idea what exists as resources, what can be improved, or, perhaps under the homepage for the group, what is needed.  In like manner, I'm on a Trauma and Critical Care mailing list, which covers two subgroups. Web people tend not to be interested in email and vice versa. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 16:00, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 
:::I have to agree with Peter.  Don't we have to have three interested editors before we create a subgroup? [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 16:12, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Actually, no -- anyone can create, although endorsement requires editors. I haven't always had an endorsing editor, although I myself have the Editor status for most except medical. Nevertheless, under "be bold", what is being broken? This is additional information and doesn't delete anything in place. 
 
::::Yes, if it might be ''also'' of value as an interim categorization system, how is it bad to help readers find things for which the current workgroups are at too coarse a level of granularity? Simply as an author, I find them useful to see what exists and what is needed. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 16:15, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 
==You've been Nominated!==
Someone has nominated you for a position in the new Citizendium.  They have noticed you're dedication to the project and like what they see.  To be listed on the ballot for the position, it is necessary that you accept the nomination on the [[Archive:Citizendium Ballot for the Management Council|Nomination page].  Just place accept next to your name along with the four tildes. The nomination period will close at midnight October 7 (UTC).  Article 54 of the new charter details the requirements:
 
===Article 54===
 
*In conjunction with the Declaration of the Editor-in-Chief regarding the effectivity of this Charter, there shall be a call for nominations for the following offices: Managament Council (five seats), Editorial Council (seven seats), Managing Editor (one), Ombudsman (one).  This shall be the effective date of the Charter.
*Any Citizen may nominate candidates for these positions. 
*Nominations shall be collected and collated by the Chief Constable.
*Nominations shall be accepted no more than fourteen days after the effective date of the charter; the ballot shall be available starting on the twentieth day after the effective date  of the charter; the election shall be completed no more than twenty-eight days after the effective date of the charter; all elected officials shall begin their term of office on the thirtieth day after the effective date of the charter. 
*Only candidates who accept their nomination shall be eligible to appear on the ballot. Nominated candidates can accept nominations for no more than two official functions.  Accepting a nomination serves as a declaration of commitment, in the case of being elected, to fulfill this function until the limit of the term.
*All positions shall be elected by a simple majority of the voting citizenry. In the case of a tie, an immediate run-off election shall be held.
*In the event that a candidate has been elected for two functions, the candidate shall declare which one he or she accepts within three days of announcement of the election results. In the event that such a declaration has not been made during this period, the candidate shall be considered elected for the position for which the nomination was accepted first. The same procedure applies to a reserve member that becomes elected by a seat being vacated this way.
 
If you would like to make a statement to help voters, click the "Statement" link to the right of your name. 
 
Thanks again for the commitment you're making to assure that Citizendium becomes the premier quality online source we all have envisioned.
 
[[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 13:17, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 
==Re your Pinkwich5.js page==
Chris, on your Pinkwich5.js page [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Chris_Day/pinkwich5.js], you show:
 
// install [[User:Pilaf/Live_Preview]] page preview tool
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="'
+ 'http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Pilaf/livepreview.js'
+ '&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>');
 
May I ask what functionality that code provides you, and how does one implement that functionality?
 
Thanks. 
 
BTW: I use WikEd, it works well in latest versions Firefox and Chrome, but not IE9 (beta) or Opera.  [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 20:06, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:Tony, I stole it all from someone's page, I forget who.  It was so I could get preview functionality.  But I don't know anything about how the code works. Sorry i can't be more helpful.  [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 23:41, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 
== Vote! ==
 
Hi Chris!  Did YOU Vote???  See the orange Sitenotice header! [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 23:59, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 
:The page I went to was a lot of nominations but I didn't notice a place to vote. I'll look again. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 02:09, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 
::That's scary!  If you couldn't find it :(  You have to follow the links to the voting pages for each one.  [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 02:11, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 
:::I got it now. I just didn't read it properly.  I was expecting to vote on the charter but that was all long gone. I'll vote now. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 02:13, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Oh, didn't think of that!  I changed the banner - see how bad we need YOU! [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 02:17, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::Well it would help if I had read the prolog instead of jumping right to the tables. Anyway I voted. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 02:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::There you go!  Democracy in action! [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 02:34, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::Perfect proof, I would say, that Democracy Is For The Birds! (hehe) [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 03:08, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 
== Approval for [[Thylakoid]] ==
 
Chris, I prepared what Gareth calls a "short and sweet" article, [[Thylakoid]].  Will you look it over to see if you could add your name to the Approval banner? Otherwise let me know what you think it might need.  Thanks.  [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 15:22, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 
== New Biology editor ==
 
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)
 
== Re [[Thylakoid]] Approval ==
 
Chris, I responded to your comments on the Thylakoid Talk page, making a number of edits and adding images.  If it looks okay to you, will you consider adding your name ToApprove. Thanks.  &mdash;[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 04:52, 28 November 2010 (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]] 17:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 
== ! ==
 
Hi, Chris, thanks for dropping in again, I knew you would. I have a question for you... [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 19:25, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 
== Nomination for the Management Council ==
 
You have been nominated for a seat on the [[CZ:Management Council|Management Council]] in the [[CZ:Election July-August 2013|July-August Special Election]]. The nominator was myself. To accept or decline this nomination, please visit the [[CZ:Election July-August 2013/Nominations#Management Council candidates and links to their Statements|Nominations]] page by midnight UTC on July 27th. You may write an election statement for each if you wish (linked from the Nominations page).
 
The Management Council seat expires on either June 30th, 2014, or June 30th, 2015 (the successful candidate with fewest voting receiving the shorter term). In the event that [[CZ:Election July-August 2013/Referenda/1|Referendum 1]] is passed, all seats will expire on June 30th, 2014. Thanks! [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 17:18, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 
== Removing Talk:ArticleName/Draft ==
 
Thanks for your note. The one thing I haven't been able to do is completely remove the /Draft Talk pages for articles with status '0' while retaining the information in the Talk page banner. The <nowiki>{{subpages}}</nowiki> template has been altered so that clicking 'Talk' in the banner goes to the main article's Talk: page, but for articles with citable versions (former approved articles), this still redirects to Talk:ArticleName/Draft and not just to Talk:ArticleName, because only the former displays the definition, unused subpages, etc. I tried to fix this by altering the '[[:Template:To Approve Inner|To Approve Inner]]' template by removing the references to 'Draft', but this results in all the information in the banner of the Talk page disappearing if the status is '0'. I tried various other edits and templates, but no joy. Can you suggest anything? Thanks. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 15:35, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
:No suggestion off the top of my head.  I'll have to re-familiarize myself with the code, but I'll take a look. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 18:58, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 
== You've been nominated as a candidate in the June 2014 election ==
 
You've been nominated as a candidate in the [[User:ElectionJune2014|June 2014 election]]. Please visit [[User:ElectionJune2014/Nominations|this page]] to accept or decline each position. No action will also be treated as declining. If you accept, you may choose to write an election statement for each position - see the election page for further details. Alternatively, contact me via my Talk page or privately via e-mail. Regards, [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 18:43, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 
== You've been nominated as a candidate in the June 2016 election ==
 
You've been nominated as a candidate for the  post of [[CZ:Managing Editor|Managing Editor]] in the [[User:ElectionJune2016|June 2016 election]]. Please visit [[User:ElectionJune2016/Nominations|this page]] to accept or decline. No action will also be treated as declining. If you accept, you may choose to write an election statement - see the election page for further details. Alternatively, contact me via my Talk page or privately via e-mail. Regards, [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] ([[User talk:John Stephenson|talk]]) 19:16, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 13:36, 25 June 2024

NOTICE: This user is unlikely to respond to questions or comments placed here.
This could be because of any of the following:
*Their registered email address is no longer working (or is rejecting Citizendium mail);
*The account has been closed;
*The user is otherwise inactive on the wiki.
The user may remove this template at any time.


The account of this former contributor was not re-activated after the server upgrade of March 2022.


——————————————— Chris' Talk Page —————————————

I am an editor in the biology workgroup | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, Current talk page (94,080)

Notes to self

The European Physical Society

{{Quote|A|B|C|D|E}} gives:

‘ A ’

—B, C

{{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}}} gives 94,080
{{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|R}} gives 94080
{{#ifexpr: {{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|R}} > 3000 | large|lemma }} gives large
{{#ifexpr: {{PAGESIZE:User talk:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|R}} < 3000 | large|lemma }} gives lemma

See:

- /Notes to self
- /Previous discussions

movelink

{{{1}}}

  • How should the r template deal with links to catalogs? Could use a separate 4th level definition but which related articles page should it link too?
  • Apostrophe bug means that the tabs are not the correct color. Fix the code to account so the if statement compares the url code.
  • Manual placement of {{dabdef|Fossilization}} needs the basepagename added manually too. If follow Noel's description will need a field in the metadata for any article that is the target of the basename redirect. No other way to figure out the basename for the {{dambigbox}} template otherwise. Alternative is do have a much more manually (for example, {{dambigbox|the process in [[palaeontology]]|Fossilization}} ) template but probably better to have it placed automatically. Drawa figure to make this more comprehensible.
  • Need to write a summary document describing the uses of {{RD}}, {{R}}, {{Rpl}} and {{pl}}.
  • For {{R}} should probably remove the {{Dabdef}} template and just write what is required. Could then have a specific template for the disambiguation request for a definition page if it is needed (I suspect no one would use it and instead just make the disambiguation page). One exception might be Daniel in combination with the RD template at CZ:List of words with multiple uses
  • Subpages template misinterprets location on the talk approval talk page (not sure I can replicate this).
  • Think over subpages format. Possibly need subpages style as third layer template with intermediary ones to define the magicword variables? Initiated this, see {{Parameters1}} and {{Parameters2}} in conjunction with {{Subpages test}} and {{Subpage style test}}.
  • If no footer or header add specific category to note this fact, preferably no other categories too. See homeopathy/Trials example.
  • must think about the status of these sub and subsub defintion pages. Note also that they exist as definition onlys rather than recognising the existance of the basepagename.
  • Lemma articles mess up the related only category such that related articles can only exist if there is some metadata. Try and write around (is this true? not sure I can replicate this either).
  • Finish userplan simplification and more focus on workgroup participation.
  • Fix move cluster - partially done, still need to fix approval page bug (when article has no approval page or when there is already an approval page present)
  • {{Lemma}} idea, see {{Test lemma}} too. Need to utlilise the pagesize magic word so we get a lemma when there is no, or very little text in an article.
  • optional photo credit
  • Article task and notification list
  • Metadata edits always current so should tie speedydelete etc to that one page. This will get around the maintenance categories often being out of date.
  • Think more about /Catalog/Masterlists See User_talk:Aleta_Curry#Masterlist for examples. Fix the same page blank code, At present there is a capital letter requirement bug as well as need to get second string if used. Also catalog masterlists and transclusion in general. No need to maintain information at multiple sites. Is substitution bot an option?
  • Figure out utlity of transcluding refs with the r template redirects.
  • Make error boxes more concise and smaller.
  • Finish up the periodic table navigation, specifically whether element data shoul be in a switch page on on individual subpages

{{r|Nova (astronomy)#Supernova|Supernova}} gives:

  • Supernova [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 Nova (astronomy)#Supernova (disambiguation) for a list of available, more precise, topics. Please add a new usage if needed.

{{r|Supernova}} gives:

  • Supernova [r]: An astronomical object exploding to a brightness similar to that of an entire galaxy. Caused by a catastrophic explosion of either a white dwarf system or an aged star about five times the size of the sun, which occurs when the star collapses; a neutron star or a black hole may be formed as a result, or the explosion results in no remaining compact object. [e]
Iteresting that the top version does not work as expected. Might need to fic the r template to asccomodate tis , if possible. 06:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


/Wanted

Need to figure out the disconnects between the rare earths periodic table of elementses and the template:periodic. Did uranium, but others need fixing too. See Uranium/Periodic table of elements

Category:False Start Move
Category:Incomplete Move
Category:DeleteMove

Too many pop-up alert messages when starting a new article

Chris, two things that have niggled me for quite some while:

  • Whenever I create a new article in my Sandbox and then use the "Start Article" link in the left-hand navigation panel:

As soon as I cut and paste the article from my sandbox into the new article (including the subpages template) and save it, three or so large popup alerts are displayed on the main article page (ahead of the article text) telling me why they have appeared and alerting me to do certain things (like filling out the Metadata template). They must be overwhelmingly confusing to a new user writing his first article. The various pop-ups are separated by a heck of a lot of white space ... so that one must scroll down quite far to even see the main article text that I just cut and pasted from my sandbox.

Can those pop-ups be made smaller, with less excessive white space between them? Or can they be combined into one pop-up and made less wordy?

  • After I've created the Definition subpage and the Talk subpage:

The Talk page has more pop-ups telling me to create the Related Articles, Bibliography and External Links subpages. Again, one must scroll down to below those pop-ups before adding a post or reading any existing posts.

Once the Main Article, Metadata template and Talk page have been created, why not autiomatically create the Definition, the Related Articles, the Bibliography and the External Links pages complete with the subpages template included in each of them? Then, instead of all those pop-ups on the Talk page, all that would be required is one sentence stating that the Definition, the Related Articles, the Bibliography and External Links subpage need to be populated as soon as possible.

I think the above suggestions would greatly simplify the task of starting a new article. What do you think? Milton Beychok 07:00, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The messages (including the whitespace) for starting an article could easily be changed in Template:Orphan subpage.
Concerning the talk page messages I have already filed a wish in CZ:Wishlist "Obtrusive requests to edit subpages". Again, they could easily be made smaller without having to create them at once. (I do not think that it is useful to create empty pages.)
However, both messages are as they are on purpose. Thus the pro-and-contra should be discussed, at least briefly.
(I agree with you, Milton) --Peter Schmitt 11:13, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Glad someone else said it. I thought it was just my ignorance, you know, like it wouldn't bother people born into the Internet era.
Not to insult the original crafters, because we've all been working in the dark on this and I still think that clusters are a brilliant idea, we just need to tweak every once in a while.
While we're at it, could we PLEASE remove Albert from the metadata fill in form? I keep re-creating page Albert Einstein and getting a 'you're messing this up' error message, which confuses me no end.
And let's remove CanE and AusE as options in the language variants. No one writes in Canadian English or Australian English, we might as well have Indian English or Trinidadian English. We only need American English and British (or Commonwealth, if you'd rather) English.
Aleta Curry 22:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
I have removed "Albert Einstein" from the field in the blank template. (I hope that nobody minds.) On this occasion I found a Metadata template wrongly attributed to Einstein. (There may be more. And there are quite a lot of Metadata requiring "abc=Einstein, Albert" that will need to be fixed.) --Peter Schmitt 01:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
In retrospect, it should have been Werner Heisenberg. --Howard C. Berkowitz 03:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
You're just so certain of that, aren't you. Russell D. Jones 14:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I do not think these alerts should go completely but we could hide most of them behind ONE generic message per page saying "Hey, something is missing or wrong. For details, click [show].". An example for such hidden stuff is at Category:Bot-created Related Articles subpages#Index. --Daniel Mietchen 15:09, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I happen to like the alerts. As rarely as I create and/or move pages, I don't remember the procedures and all that has to happen; and I'm not willing to go look up those procedures every time. But having the alerts reminds me of what I need to do to get the article "off the ground." It's a checklist, but not in a checklist format. I was unaware of the Einstein Bug. I don't know that I'd like the "something's missing" format either. It smacks of "we know something you don't, he, he." If the templating can tell me what needs to be done to get the cluster to an operating standard, then it should. Russell D. Jones 16:16, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I think you have to place yourself in the shoes of a newbie, Russell -- all of these alerts, and *long* blank spaces down through which one has to scroll, are *baffling*. "Hey, they asked me to create an article, I did, and NOW what?! WTF is goin' on here? Where's my article?! What am I supposed to do with THIS?!" Etc. etc. Even to me, after starting maybe 150 articles, I find it annoying. And THEN there's the stoopid Talk page, with the big blank space in the middle with the mysterious boxes on the right telling us to start a Related Articles page and a Bibliography, and god knows what else! It looks terrible! Fortunately I've found an answer to this: I click on each one of these demands, go to the newly opened page, type in an "x", save it, and do the same for the next one. Which at least cleans up the Talk page. Let's ask ourselves: for *whom* are we creating these minotaurian complexes? Howard and his Lemma articles? Heisenberg and Einstein and Schrodinger and his Kat to do Thought Experiments with? or for Billy Bob Thudpucker in Las Cruces, New Mexico, who just wants to write a brief article about the third-string banjo picker of the Rolling Stones? And while we're asking questions, I wonder how many of the dozens of new Authors who arrive here and then *never* contribute anything have actually *started* to write something, and then got scared away by all the inscrutable baloney they're then *apparently* required to do? So they curse, or shrug, and go away, never to return.... Hayford Peirce 16:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I would consider pages started empty or with an "x" as their single content as close to vandalism. The blank spaces can be removed easily, and it should also be possible to place the talk page messages more effectively. --Daniel Mietchen 16:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
If the blank spaces and messages can be removed or made less intrusive, then why aren't they? Who put this stuff in there in the first place? And putting an X in there isn't remotely *close* to being vandalism -- it's exactly the same thing as going into an edited page and putting in a Null so that the damn server or whatever decides to notice that a change has been made to the Metadata page, such as when we change the ABC and then it doesn't show up on the Workgroup page until the Null has been put in. Hayford Peirce 16:50, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

(undent)Can a variable be set in a user profile, which is then available to templates? The default might be "newbie". Russell would want a "verbose" mode. I would want to suppress the "suggestions"--in user design speak, "terse" or "expert" mode.

In some respects, the idea of the lemma came about as a means of entering minimum useful content without going through full cluster setup, some of which will never be relevant.

Daniel, separating the issue of removing spaces, there is no real reason to demand External Links or Bibliography. Many articles will never have them, so they can go to the list of optional pages such as Catalogs and Debate Guide. Related Articles as a suggestion, yes. The suggestion of having other articles link to this article is useful only to people that understand the overall structure, who then should not need the reminder. Now, a link to a tutorial on knowledge navigation is another matter.

Hayford, your point is well taken about scaring away newbies. The newbie mode might even suppress anything beyond the minimum and post the article to a page for more experienced people to clean up. Remember the art historian? How much work would we have saved if she had just written the article and let us do the other pages? This is one of the reasons I hesitate to make instant Editors.

Eduzendium also shows that it's rather overwhelming; Daniel's macros/templates helped a lot. If I may try an analogy, we are "cataloging". When I went to work for the Library of Congress, I was amazed to discover how much skill and knowledge is needed to create a correct catalog card. There is an enormous difference between even the scholarly users of the Library, and the professional catalogers. We are simpler at present, but does the newbie even notice the "workgroup" tab on the left? At LC, the catalogers needed to go far beyond that, but both are still controlled vocabularies. I still am confused when something is "Media" vs. "Journalism". --Howard C. Berkowitz 16:46, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I happen to think the templating here is exceptionally sophisticated and I appreciate that it can sculpt the CZ experience. I agree with the above that some of the mechanics are skewed (e.g., having to create a null edit in order for the server to update its status), but the "white space" experience, I think, is not intended for you to scroll through to get to the article; it is intended for you to fix the problem that is identified. But for people who create a lot of pages, I can see that it might be tedious to go through these hoops again and again when all you do is a null edit. Also, I see the problem of EZ. I take about 200 students a semester through the learning process of editing on the MediaWiki software and I can tell you that for a lot of them, even learning where to click to actually open the edit window can be a challenging undertaking. Complicating the scene with sophisticated templating raises the intimidation (or fear factor) of the site.
So I see three levels of users here.
  1. An author new to wikis who doesn't want to or will be overwhelmed with cluster set up. (maybe in the article creation process the article could automatically be tagged (category) with a request to set up cluster; experienced hands could take care of the list.)
  2. An experienced author who likes the process checklist to set up a cluster.
  3. An experienced cluster setter-upper who knows what to do and can't be bothered with the alerts.
Also I see issues of what exactly is needed for a bare-bones cluster set up: Metadata, certainly; definitions? maybe. Bibliography? probably not. talk page? shouldn't need a null edit. Russell D. Jones 17:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I took out some of the talk page alerts — feedback welcome. Will take a look at the page creation stuff later. --Daniel Mietchen 17:56, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Since this has evolved to a discussion of the merits and dismerits:
I think that the information seen from the subpages template is enough: It shows what subpages exist. Those who know about them and are willing to work on them can easily start there -- if they do not want then they will ignore the templates as well. (I do ...: many pages do not need external links, and many will not get a bibliography, and why create either when one has no good idea what to enter? The same is true for definitions - better no definition than a bad or incorrect one.)
Moreover, CZ explicitly encourages to start articles the "easy way" (see CZ:Start Article) -- without subpages.
-Peter Schmitt 23:00, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I now also hid the alert messages for missing metadata. The following pages are some of those that do not yet have the {{subpages}} template, so you can use them to fiddle around with the new mechanism and to provide further feedback:
Nucleoside [r]: A purine or pyrimidine base attached to a ribose (used in RNA) or deoxyribose (used in DNA). [e]
Nucleotide [r]: A repeating unit in nucleic acid polymers consisting of a purine or pyrimidine base, a pentose sugar, and a phosphate group. [e]
Lipoprotein [r]: A molecular mixture of long chains of fatty and amino acids. [e]
Critical pathway [r]: schedules of medical and nursing procedures, including diagnostic tests, medications, and consultations designed to effect an efficient, coordinated program of treatment [e]
Third molar [r]: Molars located at the rear of the mandible, commonly referred to as Wisdom teeth, that usually appear between the ages of 17 and 25 in humans. [e]
Transcendentalism [r]: Philosophical, religious, literary, cultural, and social movement associated in particular with early 19th century New England intellectuals such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, and others. [e]
Hardy–Weinberg principle [r]: Add brief definition or description
Sleep initiation and maintenance disorders [r]: A range of disorders that deal with the inability to fall asleep or stay, appropriately, asleep [e]
Hypertensive urgency [r]: Add brief definition or description
Aldosterone antagonist [r]: Compounds that inhibit or antagonize the biosynthesis or actions of aldosterone, which is part of the renin-angiotensin system. [e]
Team-based learning [r]: Pedagogical techniques in which the learners work in small teams rather than as individuals [e]
Agile software development [r]: Software development methodology based on "close collaboration between the programmer team and business experts; face-to-face communication" and "frequent delivery of new deployable business value". [e]
Alpha adrenergic blocker [r]: Add brief definition or description
British Doctors Aspirin Trial [r]: Randomized controlled trial started about 1980 that was designed to test chemoprevention with aspirin for the primary prevention of vascular disease. [e]
Health Professionals Follow-up Study [r]: Add brief definition or description
Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation [r]: Add brief definition or description
Autoimmune polyendocrinopathy [r]: Autoimmune disease affecting multiple organs [e]
Bacteriuria [r]: The presence of bacteria in the urine which is normally bacteria-free. [e]
Janus kinase [r]: A family of intracellular tyrosine kinases that participate in the signaling cascade of cytokines by associating with specific cytokine receptors. [e]
Serum osmolality [r]: Osmolality of the serum component of blood [e]
Vena cava filter [r]: Add brief definition or description
Rifampin [r]: Add brief definition or description
Patient discharge [r]: Add brief definition or description
Nephrotic syndrome [r]: Add brief definition or description
Hyponatremia [r]: Add brief definition or description
American Heart Association [r]: Add brief definition or description
Craniocerebral trauma [r]: Add brief definition or description
Palpitation [r]: Add brief definition or description
Apolipoprotein [r]: Add brief definition or description
Respiratory failure [r]: Add brief definition or description
Antiphospholipid syndrome [r]: Add brief definition or description
Intravenous infusion [r]: Add brief definition or description
Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C19 [r]: Add brief definition or description
Chronic fatigue syndrome [r]: Add brief definition or description
Human Immunodeficiency Virus [r]: Add brief definition or description
Sick sinus syndrome [r]: Add brief definition or description
Microscopic polyangiitis [r]: Add brief definition or description
Queckenstedt's maneuver [r]: Add brief definition or description
Mechanical ventilator [r]: Add brief definition or description
Dysphagia [r]: Add brief definition or description
Natriuretic peptide [r]: Add brief definition or description
Ideal body weight [r]: Add brief definition or description
Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging [r]: Add brief definition or description
Reserpine [r]: Add brief definition or description
Thrombophilia [r]: Add brief definition or description
Spontaneous abortion [r]: Add brief definition or description
Protein S [r]: Add brief definition or description
Thrombophilia [r]: Add brief definition or description
Zygapophyseal joint [r]: Add brief definition or description
Opiate dependence [r]: Add brief definition or description
Vertebra [r]: Add brief definition or description
Tramadol [r]: Add brief definition or description
Pre-eclampsia [r]: Add brief definition or description
Urinary retention [r]: Add brief definition or description
Pheochromocytoma [r]: Add brief definition or description
Glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors [r]: Add brief definition or description
Veterinary medicine [r]: Add brief definition or description
Polymyalgia rheumatica [r]: Add brief definition or description
Principal components analysis [r]: Add brief definition or description
GTP-binding protein [r]: Add brief definition or description
Intracranial hemorrhage [r]: Add brief definition or description
Adderall [r]: Add brief definition or description
Habitual abortion [r]: Add brief definition or description
Diagnostic error [r]: Add brief definition or description
--Daniel Mietchen 13:55, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Daniel i think your solution of hiding things looks great. Milt does this satisfy you? I admit the templates are a pain it is important to have some kind of visual reminder that there is an incompatibility between the metadata and the article. Hopefully they are more subtle now. Chris Day 23:09, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

That's great, Daniel! Many thanks for getting rid of all of the baloney! I just created John Dickson Carr to test your changes and everything is terrific except ONE thing: I foresee BIG problems ahead if you leave things exactly as they now are. Once one has created the article and saved it, on top of the article one sees something like needs metadate and show. If one clicks on the metadata link, one is directed to the page explaining metadata. I will bet you that *some* people will try to put their metadata into the template shown on that page! My suggestion: change the wording to what metadata means and go here to add metadata for this particular article. Thanks! Hayford Peirce 23:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Chris, I'll comment after I next create a new article ... which I hope will be a few days from now. Thanks, Milton Beychok 08:49, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Ad Hayford, I changed the phrasing to avoid that kind of confusion.
Ad Milt, proper functioning of the templates can also be validated by putting the subpages template on any of the articles in the long list I prepared above.
--Daniel Mietchen 15:43, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Daniel, that's a lot better! Now one last thing. When you click on the show button and are taken to the next page, you are shown some info at the top of the page BUT there is then a LARGE blank space beneath that info, so that unless you KNOW that you should scroll down to the bottom of the page, you won't know that you SHOULD scroll down in order to click on the "fill out the metadata" link etc. I'm sure that many people would go to this page, simply look at the top of it, wonder what the hell they were doing there, and then leave, *without* filling out any of the metadata. Can't you get rid of this useless blank space? Hayford Peirce 16:32, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Done. --Daniel Mietchen 22:17, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Great! I'll have to create another new article (sigh) to check things out one last time.... Hayford Peirce 22:40, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Daniel and Chris: I just created a new article, Crude oil desalter, and I must agree that the changes made in all those pop-up alerts is a great improvement over what they were before I started this discussion. Thanks to all. Milton Beychok 05:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
That seems just about perfect, Daniel, at least given all the previous template stuff that you have to work with. I just created Philip Atlee and have a one *minor* suggestion. When the main article has been created, we now have a header in black that says something like "The metadata is missing; if you feeling like doing it, please create it; details" then there's a blue link that says SHOW. I suggest that you rewrite the longer stuff to say something like, "The metadata is missing; if you feel up to creating it, please click on the SHOW link to the right" and REMOVE the word "details" -- it's *slightly* confusing.... Hayford Peirce 23:31, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Good suggestion. I made the change. --Peter Schmitt 23:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Peter, that's perfect! Kudos to you and Daniel. I really think that there is now going to be a lot less confusion! In fact, I'll drink to that! (Goes off to make a Scotch and soda....) Hayford Peirce 01:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Moving

Hi Chris. From what I can tell, you've been trying to clean up a few articles and put pages in their proper places recently. I noticed that this has resulted in a bibliography and external links page attached to an article about a different subject.

As I'm merely a lowly 'author', I don't think I am allowed to move pages. I thought about cutting and pasting, but then I thought it might be better if the pages were moved properly.. so I thought I'd drop you a wee note.

The article the subpages belong to is, I believe, United Empire Loyalists.

Cheers (and sorry for adding to your workload!). --Mal McKee 03:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

I moved the two files. By the way: There are no "lowly" authors. You could have made the move yourself. (You are only asked to be carful, of course.) --Peter Schmitt 10:06, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Chris, or someone else who knows what s/he's doing...

...could I prevail upon you to do the archiving thing with the January Write-a-Thon and leave me a blank page for February? Thanks! Aleta Curry 03:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

More on metadata

I'm sorry to throw the proverbial spanner, boys, but this didn't occur to me before.

I have only just created a new article since the (excellent, I may add) changes to the setup.

Could I just ask, if it's possible, for the 'create a metadata page if you feel up to it' notice box thingy to appear *after* a body has 'saved' the new article, not before? At present it appears if you "preview". Now, if you click through to metadata creation on a "preview" page, you have to remember to go back and 'save' the original, or all your hard work is lost!

I haven't (yet) tried it the other way, so I don't know what appears if you ignore the 'create metadata' bit and just click 'save' first.

Aleta Curry 01:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

You write: "Could I just ask, if it's possible, for the 'create a metadata page if you feel up to it' notice box thingy to appear *after* a body has 'saved' the new article, not before?". I'm not sure I understand this exactly. How do you normally start a new article? Chris Day 04:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
This problem/request was not related to the "Who's on First?" metadata problem, right? Chris Day 04:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Chris, I think I recognize Aleta's concern. Once the subpages template goes into a new article, "preview article" brings up the metadata prompts. From bitter experience, if I write a new article of any appreciable length, I make sure to save before inserting the template. It's not hard to get lost in the prompts, decide not to fill them in, but neglect to save and thus lose the work. --Howard C. Berkowitz 05:11, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Now I understand, I never use preview so I have not been down that route. All I can suggest is bold letters saying first save your work. Would that be sufficient? Chris Day 05:13, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I just added a warning message to save. Hope it helps. However, one will never be able to prevent all mistakes. If there are too much warnings they will not be read anymore ... Probably one has to make one's mistakes, and learn from them.
Preview can be usefull. I sometimes use preview, and sometimes not. Sometimes I wished I would have used it instead of showing my stupidity in the history ;-) --Peter Schmitt 10:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes, Howard got it in one. I'm not as brave as you are, Chris, I almost always use 'preview', I look entirely too foolish otherwise. Trust me, no one should see my 'scrap paper'! The down side, of course, is how many times I forget to actually 'save'--sigh Aleta Curry 10:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
p.s. Chris, was the Who's on First metadata problem caused by my mistake in the status field? Let's face it: I'm a genius! Aleta Curry 10:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Just a hint: If one has forgotten to save it is often still possible to go back to that edit page using the the browser's back button. --Peter Schmitt 12:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Er...yes, but when I say 'forgotten', I really mean it. Like, I've shut down the computer, turned off the generator, taken the dogs for a walk, had my hair done (okay, that's a lie), made dinner...and then I come back next day wondering where that incredibly excellent 240 page cluster that I started is! Aleta Curry 22:15, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The "Fair Use" upload summary

Chris: In the last few days, I uploaded two logos by claiming Fair Use. They were the logos for ASTM International (ASTM) and for International Organization for Standardization (ISO). When I went to CZ:UPLOAD / I am not the copyright holder / This use of the work is Fair Use, I arrived at the upload file form to be filled out. It has a one-line window in which to write the rationale for claiming Fair Use (i.e., the window labeled "Notes").

Here is what I wrote as my rationale: "The logo image is used to identify the International Organization for Standards. The significance of the logo is to help the reader identify the organization, assure the readers that they have reached the right article containing critical commentary about the organization, and illustrate the organization's intended branding message in a way that words alone could not convey. The entire logo is used to convey the meaning intended and avoid tarnishing or misrepresenting the intended image. The logo is of a size and resolution sufficient to maintain the quality intended by the organization, without being unnecessarily high resolution. Because it is a logo there is almost certainly no free equivalent. Any substitute that is not a derivative work would fail to convey the meaning intended, would tarnish or misrepresent its image, or would fail its purpose of identification or commentary."

It was very difficult to write all of that into a one-line window and to check it for spelling, grammar and omissions. Is there any way to revise that upload file form so that the "Notes" window is at least 6-8 lines wide?

By the way, most of my above rationale was borrowed from WP ... because I could find no similar rationale help in CZ. Milton Beychok 04:27, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I made a reply ing the forum. But in case you missed that. For me, I use the upload primarily as a decision tree to get the correct templates. I often make changes and additions to them after the upload is complete. In this case that might be the best way to go.
As to the technical suggestion of adding a larger edit window. I would, if I could, but I'm not sure where to make such changes. Or what to change. Possibly Peter might have a better idea? Chris Day 04:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC) test

Thanks for getting the water freezing point straightened out (if it just stays that way).

Thanks, Chris. Milton Beychok 06:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

New template

Hi, Chris. Thanks for your offer of further help (not that I can find it...)

Can you make the unknown letter at Template:Common misspellings prolog show itself, please?

Ta! Ro Thorpe 17:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Where are you not seeing it? Chris Day 17:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
I think I understand your point now. It will not show on the template itself. But look at the page where the template is used and you will see the correct letter there. Chris Day 17:50, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

That's what I thought I was doing - but anyway, it all seems to be fine now - thanks. Ro Thorpe 18:03, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Pedia tricks

Thanks for following up on it! --Daniel Mietchen 17:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Categories, bots and templates

Categories can be removed fairly easily by a bot. Let me know if that would be worth it (haven't found the page you use to track these). Also, could you please take a look at {{Basic elemental def}}, perhaps in conjunction with User:Daniel Mietchen/Sandbox/Elements? I am thinking of prepopulating the empty pages via preload templates, but would appreciate some more input. --Daniel Mietchen 19:23, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

If the bot can do that, great, although It might be tricky to program since it might not be able to predict every type of category or combination to remove? I just made an addition to your template. Check it out on an element page and see what you think. Chris Day 19:48, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
The bot can in principle be given a list of applicable categories, or wildcards could be used in defining their names. No need to program for combinations — it will simply edit the same page again when working on the next category.
Thanks — the addition is valuable, but the current setting (not mine, by the way) is not compatible with {{r}}:
Neptunium [r]: Add brief definition or description
--Daniel Mietchen 20:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Now I understand. i thought you wanted to populate the element article pages but you're actually after a template to add the definition. I'll modify it as best i can, will probably have to have the definition pages {{BASEPAGENAME}} added as a parameter, i.e. {{Basic elemental def|Parameter}}, since it will not transclude properly otherwise. Chris Day 20:55, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
I tweaked it enough now that i think it will work with the r template and also with a lemma article. Chris Day 21:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Daniel, are you trying to modify the template so it will work for the "Hydrogen (element)" format? I noticed that you had all those links on your page too. Chris Day 22:21, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Daniel and Chris, I hope you do not mind, but I wonder if it would not be better -- and require the same (or even less) effort -- to create the definitions with a bot (using the same logic as in the template)? Or even manually copy the definitions from Daniel's page to the definitions? --Peter Schmitt 23:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't know for sure but I was thinking that Daniel might be planning to use a substitute script along those lines? Chris Day 00:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I am not too eager on using a bot for just those 100 elemental definitions (too time-consuming, relatively speaking, to get it approved), so I thought I would create those pages by means of preload templates, similar to the CZ:Eduzendium course setup wizard. Ideally, there would be no piping (e.g. by integrating {{Basic elemental def}} with {{r}}.
I do plan, however, to set up a bot that creates lemma articles in place of empty pages for which a definition already exists.
On a related note, I am inclined to think that {{r|foo}} should also display Foobar/Definition if Foo redirects to Foobar and Foo/Definition does not exist. No idea how to make the template recognize a redirect page, though. --Daniel Mietchen 18:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
As for Hydrogen vs. Hydrogen (element), I would prefer the latter to be applied throughout, but think that would be up to the chemists to decide. My idea was just to prepare the templates such that a coherent system can be easily achieved. --Daniel Mietchen 18:46, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I think using (element) is not a bad idea, but I'm not a chemist.

As for {{r|foo}} using foobar definition if there is a redirect from foo->foobar, I agree that might be good but I'm not sure if it is possible to read the target if the redirect? You do know you can pipelink with the {{R}} template?

With regard to populating the pages. If you want to use all the subpages with the properties for each element they will have to be moved to the new name, i.e. Boron/Atomic number to Boron (element)/Atomic number if you do not want to have a parameter in the template. This could be done easily by moving every element along with all its subpages. I'll modify the {{Basic elemental def}} template so it does not need a piped parameter. Chris Day 19:22, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

May I remind you that using single properties subpages is a disputed matter? --Peter Schmitt 00:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm aware of that. So far, I am just asking questions of Daniel and tinkering with the template since I'm not 100% sure of what he is proposing. One thing I do think is important is to have a basic page for each element. Chris Day 02:04, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
I am aware of that too, and it actually inspired me to have another look at the matter, thus prompting my tinkering with these templates. The point here, however, is to have a consistent format, which can be achieved by means of a template transclude predefined content onto the definition page, and it can easily be adapted to either the current system with multiple properties subpages or the discussed alternative with one centralized metadata-like page. --Daniel Mietchen 23:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
On pipelinking, I am well aware of that too, but many non-bot starts of Related Articles pages are made by simply dumping in a list of related topics, formatted using {{r}}, without much regard for which articles actually exist. So we often have the case described above that {{r|foo}} does not bring about a definition, even though one exists at [[foobar/Definition]], when Foo is a redirect to Foobar. I am wondering whether this is the way it should be. --Daniel Mietchen 00:37, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

(unindent) Not related to the chemistry stuff but well within the scope of this section: Can you please take another look at Template:Bot-created related article subpage, which I attempted to modify such that it accommodates Lemma articles? Example to play around with: Biomedical engineering. Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 16:53, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Daniel, looks good to me. What is your rationale that these need to be distinguished? So we can fortify our navigation network with lemma related articles pages? Chris Day 17:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Does not look good to me — Category:Lemma Bot-created Related Articles subpages is full of articles which do have metadata. I suspect there is a problem with a wrongly placed pipe in the template or with the way I check for the presence of the Metadata page, but I couldn't figure out the details.
The rationale for this distinction is that if there is no metadata, then the names of the categories at the page will be broken, since they are by default composed from the metadata. And yes, extension of the related articles grid is the purpose of the bot, which can be configured to work with lemmas too. --Daniel Mietchen 20:12, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Strange. I'll double check. Chris Day 20:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
That was it. Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 20:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Automated handling of content - doubts

Sorry that I am negative. But I have serious reservations against any automatic handling of content. Providing a standardized definition for the elements is rather easy (and in principle I like thinking of the logic behind such programs) but I don't think that they are really useful. Giving the atomic number in the definiton is trivial, but not very informative. Some element specific information (about its importance, or some peculiar property, etc.) is much better. Now, of course, the generated definition can alway be replaced. -- but it is much more likely that a non-existing definition is provided than that an existing one (correct though simplistic) is rewritten.

Concerning the idea to automatically convert all definitions without main page to lemma articles: I think there is a legitimate use for lemma articles (ask Howard), for definitions to redirects, but also for definitions without a page (only intended to be used in Related Articles). The difference is that -- if the page does exist -- a link to that page will look correct though it may be better to link to another page. This decision cannot be made by a bot. (For the same reason I think that one also should be careful with redirects and only use them for "correct" titles. but not to lead from incorrect titles to a correct one.)

--Peter Schmitt 00:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I think I disagree with the first paragraph, while I am not sure I understand the second. But once we have a coherent template system, I wanted to bring the matter to the forums anyway. --Daniel Mietchen 23:23, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
The purpose of lemma articles is discussed in this dedicated thread at the Forums. --Daniel Mietchen 09:53, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

About National Institute of Standards and Technology and metadata templates without provisions for subgroups

Chris, the National Institute of Standards and Technology was written before there were any subgroups and the Metadata template specified only the Physics and the Chemistry workgroups. I added the Engineering workgroup.

The was no place to add a subgroup, so I added sub1, sub2 and sub3 to the template. Then I specified Chemical Engineering as sub1.

The bottom of the Main Article then listed the categories as Physics, Chemistry, Engineering and Chemical Engineering as it should. The National Institute of Standards and Technology shows up in the Physics and Chemistry and Engineering workgroups as it should do ... but I cannot get it to show up in the Engineering and Chemical Engineering subgroups despite twice making a null edit to the article's Talk page. Can you please get it to show up in the Engineering workgroup and the Chemical Engineering subgroup?

There are a good many of the older articles that have metadata templates which don't have sub1, sub2 and sub3 in them ... so perhaps they should be added somehow. Milton Beychok 17:41, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Milt the null edit needs to be made to the article. i just did that and it is now listed as you'd expect. Chris Day 18:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
As to the sub1-3 field holders, yes they were a fairly recent addition so many metadata pages will not have them. Possibly Daniel could add them with a bot? Chris Day 18:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

That's one false move for man ...

Chris, I think I understand that a page is placed in Category:False Start Move when the metadata template is not completed, but can you explain how United States War Department shows up in that category when that page is only a redirect? Russell D. Jones 18:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

This is normally because it was in the false move category and then the metadata gets cleaned up, thus it is out of the category. Now the flaw in our system (auto placement of categories), the article is listed in the categories that exist when it was last edited. It should be removed from the category after a minor edit to the article. Chris Day 18:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I just looked into this a little more closely and it is actually due to it being on the talk page (See Talk:United_States_War_Department). Citizendium differs from other wiki's in that a talk page will show up on a category without the name space being listed. BUT, sometimes you can distinguish this since it will be listed in the category under T. The reason we do this is that many of the housekeeping categories are placed on the talk page, so such categories do not have every entry starting with "Talk:". Chris Day 19:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Ah-ha, I've got it. Thanks for the clarification. Any reason why I can't do a clean-up? Russell D. Jones 19:06, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
No reason, that is what you should do. The subpages template should be removed from that page as it does not work on talk pages of redirects. The talk page could be speedydeleted if it is empty too. Chris Day 20:51, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I've discovered that some Lemma articles are showing on this list. Any advice there? Russell D. Jones 21:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I just jogged Evolution of language and it got removed from the category. I'm not sure why it was in there, looking at the history there is no clear reason. All I can imagine is that Daniel added the subpages template to start the lemma article before the he created the definition page. In that order there would be a false start category that would disappear with the creation of the definition subpage. In such instances the article will always need to be jogged with a null edit or it will remain in the false start category, even though the category no longer appears on the page. Chris Day 21:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Correct guess on Evolution of language, Chris. I did that on purpose to test how the {{subpages}} machinery would react to this unusual order of page creation, and think we should somehow include this scenario into the phrasing of the warning messages, depending on whether a definition already exists or not. --Daniel Mietchen 22:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Here's another quirk of the functionality: If a user creates a page all in one edit with a subpages template, the page will get categorized as "False Start Move" but it will not show up on Category:False Start Move. It requires two edits to the article page before it will show on the category page. See Declaration of the United Nations. Russell D. Jones 22:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

So presumably an edit only uses categories that are already on the page. I wonder if that is the case with manually added categories? By the way, these are general issues with the wiki software. I think you'll find they exist on your in-house wiki, as well as wikipedia. Obviously this is less of a problem when there are a lot of edits. One of the advantages of having a ton of vandalism?? Chris Day 22:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I just tried creating a page and adding the category manually. In that case the edit does register correctly. So it is the auto-generated categories, only, that need the double kick. What a pain. Chris Day 22:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Wow

Noticing changes that you and Howard made to the "Criticism of US foreign policy" article -- excellent idea to make military spending as a % of GDP; you guys are pros. Impressed.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 01:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Error correction/s

There needs to be a better way of handling external complaints than going public with the emails on the Talk page. My suggestion is to leave the 'complaint' on the appropriate workgroup forum or forward the post to the appropriate mailing list. The workgroup mailing lists and workgroup forums are currently under-utilised. 01:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. Chris Day 01:24, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
There are no errors in the article btw. Listen is a totally different group/line-up to Obs-Tweedle. Noddy Holder as 'roadie' is referenced. Meg Ireland 01:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Having no access to the images I can't comment further, however since my information was gleaned off Bill Bonham who played in the band Obs-Tweedle, I'm fairly confident his information is correct. Meg Ireland 04:20, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Chris, I just spoke again to Bill Bonham who confirms the article I wrote as being correct. Bill Bonham knows Noddy Holder very well. You can visit Bill Bonham's MySpace site at http://www.myspace.com/quiffo . Meg Ireland 08:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

For what it's worth I uploaded the pictures on the messageboard. For the record I don't doubt your sources. Chris Day 17:17, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Chris. Some of those newspaper clippings appear to have been taken from scans on the LedZeppelin.com forum thread called 'HOBBSTWEEDLE' (yes I know, an incorrect name by another poster) originally scanned by a guy in Birmingham called Chris. I was a part of that thread discussion on Obs-Tweedle. I might reuse some of those clippings for the Listen article, rather than the Obs-Tweedle article since they are two different bands. While it may have been possible Noddy Holder was roadie for Listen, my insertion of Robert Plant's quote was based on Plant's recollections which are referenced from Q magazine and repeated in subsequent newspapers, and from what I could gather from my interview with Bill Bonham in 2009, before I composed the article. On the quote about Bill Bonham playing keyboards with Hari Kari while Robert Plant was singing for Obs-Tweedle, here is an email response I received from Bill this morning: 'Yes I was in Hari Kari but when I was in Hari Kari was way after Terry Reid and Led Zep came out with there first album.. Obs-Tweedle split when I joined Terry Reid or some time after I left' He is clear he didn't join Hari Kari until after Obs-Tweedle folded. Meg Ireland 22:16, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

(Unindent) I don't know anything about the pros and cons of the info in this article or of the worth of the newspaper clippings -- I merely brought them to your attention. But please review the CZ guidelines on what Wikipedia loves to kick around as Original Research. Our own strictures are less rigid, but they *do* exist. Larry, for instance, made it clear, when I first joined, that the fact that Robert A. Heinlein told me that one book or another was his best book could NOT be incorporated within the Heinlein article. He encouraged me to write a Topic Informant article, however, (TI:Hayford Peirce/Heinlein,) with this information in it, and a link to that article now appears at the top of the Heinlein Talk page (Talk:Robert A. Heinlein). It may be that some of the information in this article should be handled in the same manner.Hayford Peirce 22:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

This is not original research. The quote, which seems to have sparked that email, is referenced from a reliable published source (according to WP standards). External references are used throughout the article. There are no errors in the article. This appears to be a case of someone who confused Listen with Obs-Tweedle and/or dislikes the fact that Robert Plant referred to their idol Noddy Holder as a roadie. Nothing is 'made up' or unverifiable for this article. Meg Ireland 23:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I do not see any reason to exclude "personal communications" (they are used in scientific literature, too). Why should a personal communication to an author be excluded (if labelled as such) when a source that cites a personal communication would be accepted? --Peter Schmitt 16:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Because the source citing it is deemed to have checked and certified it. Authors on CZ have no recognized authority to do that. I don't know whether editors do. Peter Jackson 17:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Quintile

Chris, this is a minor issue, but it could lead to establishing some general policy. By accident, I noticed that you deleted Talk:Quintile (after copying part of it to Talk:Percentile). I left it with the redirect because it is part of the history of this page, and it does not hurt if it remains there. (My tendency is to preserve as much history as possible, e.g., by blanking rather than deleting.) --Peter Schmitt 16:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for helping me to edit that list. Nick Bagnall 16:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Copyedit to protected page

Hi Chris,

in {{Community}}, can you please change the "Main Page" in 

|width=10% align=center style="background:#F5F5F5"|<small>[[Main Page]]</small>

to "Welcome Page"? Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 18:43, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Daniel, that was a cascading protect from kim's talk page. I edited her page and it seems to have removed the protection on that template. I'll change it though too. Chris Day 18:59, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

CZ:Request Approved Article Copyedit

Chris, with Matt being AWOL for the past 10 days or so, the list of approved articles needing copy edits is growing. I have about 10 approved articles listed there myself. Can you fix those?

If you need a volunteer to do some of that work, either temporarily or permanently, I am available ... but I will need some tutoring on how to do it. Regards, Milton Beychok 19:49, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your prompt response. There is still Chemical engineering where Meg Ireland corrected spelling of succesfully to successfully. Could you do that one as well? Thanks, Milton Beychok 21:06, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
I think that was specific to the draft as it is not in the main article. Chris Day 21:22, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Intron

Hi I found some new info about Intron but I wasn't sure if you wanted to include it in the article; currently it's in the sandbox User talk:Thomas Wright Sulcer/sandbox7 plus some pictures and diagrams. Feel free to include it; I'm not a scientist, and I found that while I couldn't make much sense of the technical articles, when reporters explained it, I could grasp the basics.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 04:56, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks good Thomas. Feel free to paste it into the article. I can work on it there. Chris Day 20:06, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
OK, thanks Chris, like I'm not a scientist and so it's cool that you can catch glitches which reporters make.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 00:42, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The Image:Gasoline Fuel.jpg

Chris, I don't know how you did it, but your merge of the two photos is very much better than my original one. Thanks very much. Milton Beychok 18:22, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

When I cut out the gas pump I made sure the selection tool cut all the white out. I merged the two images using the anti-alias option so the edges of the pump did not look too sharp. Third, I brightened up the pump to make it a little more striking. Glad you like the changes. Chris Day 20:09, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Intersection of cat adoption and tall tale?

Tall tail?

(I am not making this up: Mr. Clark rejected tuna, wet disgusting cat food, and his expensive hypoallergenic dry cat food. He insisted on going upstairs into the general cat area, and into the bin of regular dry cat food -- in which he then went to sleep.) Howard C. Berkowitz 19:10, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

2012

I'm kind of looking for a green light before working on "2012" -- not that I'm that interested in it, but wondering what the policy is and whether others here will support it. It's a hot article on WP even though it's kind of a stupid subject (futurism stuff) as well as a movie. Wondering if there's some kind of "approvals in advance" place to get permission for dubious articles.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 17:54, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I really don't know much about it. But it would be no worse than an article about UFO's or astrology. Chris Day 18:28, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
OK, thanks, so you're saying if I write it, that you don't think I'll have problems with it. Thanx, Chris.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 18:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
I can't think of a reason why there would be a problem. Chris Day 18:44, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Asking for your comments

Chris, would you look at the "Nitrogen cycle" section of the Air article ... and make any revisions you think are needed? Thanks, Milton Beychok 19:30, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Can you improve Image:Venturi Tube.png ?

Chris, the only drawing program I have is Microsoft's Paint program that is included with Windows XP. As you can see in Image:Venturi Tube.png, the lines that are not horizontal or vertical (that is, the angled lines) are quite "jagged". Does your program create angled lines that are not jagged? If so, could you replace the jagged lines in Image:Venturi Tube.png with lines that are not jagged? It would greatly improve that image. Milton Beychok 05:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Milt, there are multiple free graphics packages out there that far exceed the capabilities of MS Pain(t) — to the point of being hypercomplex. Two that probably merit a look for diagrams like these are Open Office Draw and Gimp. --Daniel Mietchen 08:59, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Daniel. One of these days I will take the time to download one of those and learn how to use it. Milton Beychok 17:31, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Chris, thanks for fixing the Venturi image for me. It looks much better now. Milton Beychok 17:31, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Your talk at the New Communication Channels for Biology Workshop 2008

Hi Chris, can you send me your slides from that workshop, or put them online? They may be useful for drafting the OKCon 2010 paper. Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 18:38, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Wow, i'd forgotten about that. I'll root them out. Just looked on this computer and no sign, it must still be on my semi-dead (screen is broken) lap top. I'll boot it up tomorrow and see if i can find anthing on its hard drive. Chris Day 03:17, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! I put the slides up here for everyone to work on. --Daniel Mietchen 09:47, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

CC vs. PD

How, for Pete's sake (as some would say), can I upload (and correctly credit) an image directly as PD? The only option I saw to do so always leads to it being labeled as CC0-1.0, and at least in this set of three images (which shall serve to illustrate the Panton Principles), I do not want to have any name attached to it, because that is the message of these Principles. --Daniel Mietchen 14:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I just looked at the upload file link and it seems to be click on the "I am not the copyright holder" tab. Then select the "in the public domain" option. Then for the license select "creator has released into the public domain". Are you not seeing those options when you do the upload? Chris Day 14:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
I do, though this time I went there via "I am the copyright holder" and "Release into the Public Domain", which gave the CC0 attribution. I think the problem with the upload wizard is that Caesar left when he was mostly but not entirely done with it. --Daniel Mietchen 14:19, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
[EC] OK, I just followed the "I am the copyright holder fork" and now I see how you got to "Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal License". I guess that is equivalent to public domain? But this is beyond my ken. If Caesar was not done with it, possibly the PD license option should be at that point too? Chris Day 14:20, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
The two are practically equivalent in the US but CC0 is more universal, since most jurisdictions do not have PD, but all have copyright law. Anyway, CC0 means that also no BY is needed. --Daniel Mietchen 14:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
I've just spent 10 frustrating minutes at Image:Drink to Yesterday.jpg trying to "Upload a new version of this file". Can't be done. All you can do is start all over again and upload another file under another name AND fill out all the @#$%^&* information that you had to do with the first one! And unless you're maybe a combination of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, you can't "Edit this file using an exterior application" either. Geez! Hayford Peirce 00:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
That doesn't sound right. Are you using the link titled "Upload a new version of this file" just above the Links section title. Chris Day 00:43, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes. Hayford Peirce 00:55, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
PS -- I use Chrome as my browser. Could that be affecting things in some mysterious way? Hayford Peirce 01:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
If you choose the new file to upload and then save, leave everything else blank, then it will be fine. You'll see. It will ask you if you want to ignore all warnings. Select yes and then you're done. Chris Day 00:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
It keeps telling me that I need License info, and the license info isn't what I want. And it won't work unless I choose a license. No way. Hayford Peirce 01:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
I just tried it, and it works fine with jpg, but when I use .png, I get "The file is corrupt or has an incorrect extension. Please check the file and upload again." --Daniel Mietchen 01:08, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
It still doesn't work. I have, on my computer, a *smaller* version of the present image. It has the same name and is a .jpg. A few minutes ago I had a slightly different name on it, but it was the same .jpg file. It doesn't matter *what* it's called. No matter *what* I do, I am told that I MUST choose a license. If I don't choose a license, it will NOT upload the file. Period. Hayford Peirce 01:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
I just tried and it worked fine. All I did was choose the new file on my desktop. Then save. Then chose ignore all warnings. That's it. All the files data and licenses are intact. Chris Day 02:21, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
A box doesn't pop up and tell you that you have to choose a license? Do you have a Papal dispensation, or what? Hayford Peirce 03:48, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
No, I've never seen that and I've updated images at CZ quite a few times. Chris Day 04:15, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Off to bed, but tomorrow I'll do a screen capture of the box I get and I'll email it to you. Don't know what else to do. Hayford Peirce 04:43, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Space Invaders

Sorry, I thought I'd got the hang of new pages but apparently not. I've seen the changes you made and will follow the example when making futher pages. --Chris Key 00:29, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Lemma formatting

What do you think of displaying the definition above the instructions in lemma articles? I just did the switch (also this one). --Daniel Mietchen 11:32, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Somehow, the definition pages do not display properly now, and I guess {{subpages}} would have to be remodeled to accomodate the change I made. Do you think that's worth it? --Daniel Mietchen 19:50, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
I reverted both changes and moved the testing to the test wiki: Lemma, Def only. --Daniel Mietchen 01:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Could not pinpoint exactly what the problem was, so I went back to normal for the time being. On a related note, what do you think of merging {{Def only}} and {{Lemma}}? --Daniel Mietchen 23:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
I would not be against that. I'll have a look and see how it can be streamlined, or do you already have a plan? Chris Day 03:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I do, but can't put it in words easily (other than moving the conditionals from {{Def only}} to {{Lemma}}). Will thus give it a go on the test wiki, and let you know how things go. --Daniel Mietchen 07:32, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I merged them and added some categories, which makes {{Def only}}, Category:Definition Only and Category:Related Articles Only redundant. Please check and adapt as you see fit. Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 11:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Things work fine on the test wiki, but the display problem that started this thread interfered when I did bring the changes over to the live wiki (where {{subpages}} has not been updated yet. So please transfer this edit to {{subpages}} (possibly with this typo correction) and then revert this edit. Test clusters: Glia, Open Knowledge Foundation. Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 12:49, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Daniel, i made the change but is the definition page the way you intended? Chris Day 17:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Fixed and streamlined. --Daniel Mietchen 22:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Nice work Daniel, that's a big improvement. Chris Day 23:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The section on "Nitrogen cycle" in the Air article

Chris, about two weeks ago I asked you to look at the section on "Nitrogen cycle" in the Air article and revise it in any way you felt was needed. I know you've been busy, but I would still appreciate your review as a biology editor of that that section. Thanks in advance. Milton Beychok 16:56, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Milton I looked at the Nitrogen cycle article and proposed a revamping here in a sandbox: User talk:Thomas Wright Sulcer/sandbox2 I expanded it but I'm not a scientist or technically-minded like you or Chris so I'm deferring to your judgment. I'm finding my paint program doesn't work well, so I hand-drew a diagram, but still am unhappy with it. I'm wondering if there's a good paint program that is simple, powerful, works with Ubuntu Linux so I can do better quality stuff here.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 02:25, 27 March 201UTC)
Thomas, my request of Chris was simply to take a look at the small section of the Air article that briefly describes the nitrogen cycle ... briefly on purpose.
What you have written in your sandbox2 is a an expansion of the stub article on the Nitrogen cycle ... which I very much agree needs to be expanded, but which is out of my field of expertise. So I don't believe that I am really qualified to comment on your expansion of that stub article. I would suggest that, in addition to Chris Day who is a biology editor, you contact Anthony Sebastian who is also a Biology editor and quite active. I would also point out that a very good drawing of the cycle is available in Wikimedia Commons [1] where it is designated as being in the public domain. Other good drawings can probably be found with a bit of Googling. Regards, 03:27, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
Does Anthony Sebastian have the "Nitrogen cycle" article on his watchlist? If so he'll see a note I placed there. I did this article first so that I would be in a position to help you with the "Nitrogen cycle" section of the "Air" article. But I'm not an expert by any stretch either. Good idea to get the picture on Wikimedia Commons -- my drawing didn't come out as well as I had hoped, but I still have illusions of being an excellent CZ sketch artist!--Thomas Wright Sulcer 14:27, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

False start move

Hi Chris, I think Category:False Start Move is overpopulated, and at least partly with what should rather be in Category:Lemma Article, e.g. pages like Citizen science/External Links. As far as I can tell, the culprit is the if nesting in {{Subpages}}, so I can't fix it. Please check. Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 23:24, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Daniel, is this still a problem? There did not seem that many there or is that because you have processed them? From what i could see they were mostly left over subpages or lemma like pages without a definition. Chris Day 18:06, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I think I see what you mean, now that i have looked more closely at the example of Citizen science/External Links. At present the only lemma subpages supported are /Related Articles and /Definition. Are you suggesting that we should allow /External Links and /Bibliographies too? Chris Day 18:11, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes, and Video. In principle, I would like to have all subpages enabled for Lemmas. This allows to collect materials in the right place even though the article has not been written yet. --Daniel Mietchen 18:34, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I'll look at the coding and see if it is an easy fix or not. If so I'll do it as soon as possible. Chris Day 18:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
If you would unlock it over on the test wiki, I could join the coding. --Daniel Mietchen 19:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I have changed and tested it on the test wiki. Please transfer it here. Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 20:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! My edit also contained a typo correction. --Daniel Mietchen 08:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Nomenclature for botany articles

Plant hormone or plant hormones or plant growth hormones?

  • Auxin or auxins?
  • Cytokinin or cytokinins? The animal article is cytokines.
  • Gibberellin or giberellins?
  • Tissue culture
    • Plant tissue culture

I'm beginning to think I need to become your student... --Howard C. Berkowitz 22:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I've been his student for years...Anthony.Sebastian 03:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Checklist22

Hi Chris, please comment on this, either there or here. Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 19:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

You just want to know about the test link? That was a hyperlink to walk authors through a move cluster sequence. I did that by opular demand to try and make the process of moving a cluster more efficient and transparent. It never really did serve the purpose as things got complicated if the article was moved before the metadata template. Since then, it got broken with a mediawiki update and i could not figure out a good work around. I had forgotten it was still available as an option. We should probably just remove and delete all the templates associated with it. Chris Day 19:25, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, fixed. --Daniel Mietchen 20:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


Please join with me in urging Hayford not to resign

Chris, see my plea to Hayford not to resign as Constable (on his Talk page). Please join me! Milton Beychok 20:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Listing-defined references test

As of September 2009, the Cite.php extension was modified to support list-defined references. These can be implemented with the parameter to the {{reflist}} template, or by using a pair of HTML tags (<references> and </references>) in place of the <references/> tag. These reduce clutter within articles, by putting all the citation details in the section at the end where the footnotes are displayed. As with other citation formats, these should not be added to articles that already have a stable referencing system, unless there is consensus to do so. When in doubt, use the referencing system added by the first major contributor to use a consistent style.

The example below shows what list-defined references look like in the edit box:

The Sun is pretty big,<ref name=Miller2005p23/>
but the Moon is not so big.<ref name=Brown2006/>
The Sun is also quite hot.<ref name=Miller2005p34/>
==Notes==
{{reflist|refs=
<ref name=Miller2005p23>Miller, E: ''The Sun'', page 23. Academic Press, 2005.</ref>
<ref name=Miller2005p34>Miller, E: ''The Sun'', page 34. Academic Press, 2005.</ref>
<ref name=Brown2006>Brown, R: "Size of the Moon", ''Scientific American'', 51(78):46</ref>
}}

Below is how this would look in the article, once you had previewed or saved your edited section:

The Sun is pretty big,[1] but the Moon is not so big.[2] The Sun is also quite hot.[3]

Notes

  1. ^ Miller, E: The Sun, page 23. Academic Press, 2005.
  2. ^ Brown, R: "Size of the Moon", Scientific American, 51(78):46.
  3. ^ Miller, E: The Sun, page 34. Academic Press, 2005.

Defined references must be used within the body; unused references will show an error message. However, non-list-defined references (i.e. ordinary footnote references fully enclosed with <ref> and </ref> tags) will display as normal along with any list-defined ones.

The Sun is pretty big,[1] but the Moon is not so big.[2] The Sun is also quite hot.[3]

  1. ↑ Miller, E: The Sun, page 23. Academic Press, 2005.
  2. ↑ Brown, R: "Size of the Moon", Scientific American, 51(78):46
  3. ↑ Miller, E: The Sun, page 34. Academic Press, 2005.
Chris, I tried this because it is such a great improvement ... but I cannot get it to work. Milton Beychok 22:35, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
I tried it in my WP sandbox and it works perfectly. But the identical edit box coding does not work in my CZ sandbox. Has that Cite.php extension revision been implemented for CZ? It would greatly improvement the readability of edit boxes and make editing revisions, rewrites, etc. very much easier. Milton Beychok 23:36, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
I agree with you with regard to why we want this here. I'm assuming this does not work here at CZ, I was testing it here. The text above might be confusing, it is a direct cut and paste from wikipedia. I'll ask Dan if he knows what to changes need to be made to the Cite.php exension here to make this workable.Chris Day 21:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Categories for images

What do you think of letting images inherit the categories of the articles they are used in? I think this should not be too complicated — the code for this is all in the {{subpages}} system, and images are placed via {{image}}. The only problem I see is that imagemaps are currently not compatible with the latter. --Daniel Mietchen 20:38, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

How would the categories be placed on the image page? What is the mechanism for "inheriting" the categories from the articles they are placed in?
As to the plan, it sounds like a good way to know what images are being used in each workgroup or subgroup. A problem I forsee in the future is that such categories are too broad. A better way would be able to break them down further into groups of categories, i.e. pictures used in articles on "Biology AND Chemistry" or "Biology AND Chemistry AND Health Sciences" Would that be possible? Chris Day 21:15, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
The more I think about it, the less sure I am about the mechanism, at least with the currently installed extensions. My initial thought was that we would need an {{images}} template on each image, which could then place categories much like the subpages system does. The problem is that there is just one place where the relevant information is stored in the subpages system, and unless we introduce some metadata system for images (which would probably not be a good idea), there will always be several such places for images used on more than one page. SemanticMediaWiki, however, may come to the rescue, so by the time we really need the feature, we may actually have it. --Daniel Mietchen 16:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Re-approval of Gasoline

Hi, Chris, I think that I have responded to the points raised by you and by Howard on Talk:Gasoline. Howard has asked for your help in how to do the re-approval nomination (see Talk:Gasoline). Would you please help him? Thanks, Milton Beychok 20:45, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

" Nitrogen cycle" section of Air

Chris, I noted your very recent edits of Nitrogen cycle. I would much appreciate your looking at the "Nitrogen cycle" section of the Air article and correcting/revising/whatever you believe is needed. Thanks, Milton Beychok 00:08, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Better use of subgroups?

As you may have noticed, I've been creating quite a few subgroups (e.g., the specialties of internal medicine, veterinary medicine), assorted computing topics, etc. In general, I conceived each subgroup as highly correlated with a mailing list, professional organization, or some other recruitment target.

If they are to be a recruiting and work planning tool, would it be possible to display the article status in the list of articles for the group, rather like rpl? Howard C. Berkowitz 06:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

It also might be useful to display the list of subgroups from a link on the left, just as we do for workgroups. Someone else probably has to do that.
The Subgroups article seems to suggest there can be subgroups of subgroups, but doesn't explain the syntax. Here would be an example:
  • CZ Internet applications subgroup
    • CZ World Wide Web subgroup
    • CZ Electronic mail subgroup
    • CZ Distributed computing subgroup

--Howard C. Berkowitz 15:12, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

As I have already said elsewhere: The idea of workgroups, subgroups, and potential subsubgroups should not be used as a substitute for a good subject classification (we will need one!). Unless there are at least three (better more) authors interested a "group" makes no sense. --Peter Schmitt 15:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm not suggesting these as a substitute for classification. I'm suggesting these as preparing for an agreed-to recruiting campaign just to get such members, for which we clearly don't have enough current Citizens. For example, CZ: Internet operations is the specific goal of the North American Network Operators Group, which has a mailing list to which I subscribe and at which I've been active. If I send a mail to the list soliciting membership, including a pointer to the subgroup gives potential Citizens an idea what exists as resources, what can be improved, or, perhaps under the homepage for the group, what is needed. In like manner, I'm on a Trauma and Critical Care mailing list, which covers two subgroups. Web people tend not to be interested in email and vice versa. Howard C. Berkowitz 16:00, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
I have to agree with Peter. Don't we have to have three interested editors before we create a subgroup? D. Matt Innis 16:12, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Actually, no -- anyone can create, although endorsement requires editors. I haven't always had an endorsing editor, although I myself have the Editor status for most except medical. Nevertheless, under "be bold", what is being broken? This is additional information and doesn't delete anything in place.
Yes, if it might be also of value as an interim categorization system, how is it bad to help readers find things for which the current workgroups are at too coarse a level of granularity? Simply as an author, I find them useful to see what exists and what is needed. Howard C. Berkowitz 16:15, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

You've been Nominated!

Someone has nominated you for a position in the new Citizendium. They have noticed you're dedication to the project and like what they see. To be listed on the ballot for the position, it is necessary that you accept the nomination on the [[Archive:Citizendium Ballot for the Management Council|Nomination page]. Just place accept next to your name along with the four tildes. The nomination period will close at midnight October 7 (UTC). Article 54 of the new charter details the requirements:

Article 54

  • In conjunction with the Declaration of the Editor-in-Chief regarding the effectivity of this Charter, there shall be a call for nominations for the following offices: Managament Council (five seats), Editorial Council (seven seats), Managing Editor (one), Ombudsman (one). This shall be the effective date of the Charter.
  • Any Citizen may nominate candidates for these positions.
  • Nominations shall be collected and collated by the Chief Constable.
  • Nominations shall be accepted no more than fourteen days after the effective date of the charter; the ballot shall be available starting on the twentieth day after the effective date of the charter; the election shall be completed no more than twenty-eight days after the effective date of the charter; all elected officials shall begin their term of office on the thirtieth day after the effective date of the charter.
  • Only candidates who accept their nomination shall be eligible to appear on the ballot. Nominated candidates can accept nominations for no more than two official functions. Accepting a nomination serves as a declaration of commitment, in the case of being elected, to fulfill this function until the limit of the term.
  • All positions shall be elected by a simple majority of the voting citizenry. In the case of a tie, an immediate run-off election shall be held.
  • In the event that a candidate has been elected for two functions, the candidate shall declare which one he or she accepts within three days of announcement of the election results. In the event that such a declaration has not been made during this period, the candidate shall be considered elected for the position for which the nomination was accepted first. The same procedure applies to a reserve member that becomes elected by a seat being vacated this way.

If you would like to make a statement to help voters, click the "Statement" link to the right of your name.

Thanks again for the commitment you're making to assure that Citizendium becomes the premier quality online source we all have envisioned.

D. Matt Innis 13:17, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Re your Pinkwich5.js page

Chris, on your Pinkwich5.js page [2], you show: 

// install User:Pilaf/Live_Preview page preview tool
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="'
+ 'http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Pilaf/livepreview.js'
+ '&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>');

May I ask what functionality that code provides you, and how does one implement that functionality?

Thanks.

BTW: I use WikEd, it works well in latest versions Firefox and Chrome, but not IE9 (beta) or Opera. Anthony.Sebastian 20:06, 11 October 2010 (UTC)


Tony, I stole it all from someone's page, I forget who. It was so I could get preview functionality. But I don't know anything about how the code works. Sorry i can't be more helpful. Chris Day 23:41, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Vote!

Hi Chris! Did YOU Vote??? See the orange Sitenotice header! D. Matt Innis 23:59, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

The page I went to was a lot of nominations but I didn't notice a place to vote. I'll look again. Chris Day 02:09, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
That's scary! If you couldn't find it :( You have to follow the links to the voting pages for each one. D. Matt Innis 02:11, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
I got it now. I just didn't read it properly. I was expecting to vote on the charter but that was all long gone. I'll vote now. Chris Day 02:13, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Oh, didn't think of that! I changed the banner - see how bad we need YOU! D. Matt Innis 02:17, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Well it would help if I had read the prolog instead of jumping right to the tables. Anyway I voted. Chris Day 02:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
There you go! Democracy in action! D. Matt Innis 02:34, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Perfect proof, I would say, that Democracy Is For The Birds! (hehe) Hayford Peirce 03:08, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Approval for Thylakoid

Chris, I prepared what Gareth calls a "short and sweet" article, Thylakoid. Will you look it over to see if you could add your name to the Approval banner? Otherwise let me know what you think it might need. Thanks. Anthony.Sebastian 15:22, 17 November 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)

Re Thylakoid Approval

Chris, I responded to your comments on the Thylakoid Talk page, making a number of edits and adding images. If it looks okay to you, will you consider adding your name ToApprove. Thanks. —Anthony.Sebastian 04:52, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

New Biology author

User:James Parker is a new Biology author, a student at Edinburgh interested in molecular genetics. Bruce M. Tindall 17:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

!

Hi, Chris, thanks for dropping in again, I knew you would. I have a question for you... Ro Thorpe 19:25, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for the Management Council

You have been nominated for a seat on the Management Council in the July-August Special Election. The nominator was myself. To accept or decline this nomination, please visit the Nominations page by midnight UTC on July 27th. You may write an election statement for each if you wish (linked from the Nominations page).

The Management Council seat expires on either June 30th, 2014, or June 30th, 2015 (the successful candidate with fewest voting receiving the shorter term). In the event that Referendum 1 is passed, all seats will expire on June 30th, 2014. Thanks! John Stephenson 17:18, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Removing Talk:ArticleName/Draft

Thanks for your note. The one thing I haven't been able to do is completely remove the /Draft Talk pages for articles with status '0' while retaining the information in the Talk page banner. The {{subpages}} template has been altered so that clicking 'Talk' in the banner goes to the main article's Talk: page, but for articles with citable versions (former approved articles), this still redirects to Talk:ArticleName/Draft and not just to Talk:ArticleName, because only the former displays the definition, unused subpages, etc. I tried to fix this by altering the 'To Approve Inner' template by removing the references to 'Draft', but this results in all the information in the banner of the Talk page disappearing if the status is '0'. I tried various other edits and templates, but no joy. Can you suggest anything? Thanks. John Stephenson 15:35, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

No suggestion off the top of my head. I'll have to re-familiarize myself with the code, but I'll take a look. Chris Day 18:58, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

You've been nominated as a candidate in the June 2014 election

You've been nominated as a candidate in the June 2014 election. Please visit this page to accept or decline each position. No action will also be treated as declining. If you accept, you may choose to write an election statement for each position - see the election page for further details. Alternatively, contact me via my Talk page or privately via e-mail. Regards, John Stephenson 18:43, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

You've been nominated as a candidate in the June 2016 election

You've been nominated as a candidate for the post of Managing Editor in the June 2016 election. Please visit this page to accept or decline. No action will also be treated as declining. If you accept, you may choose to write an election statement - see the election page for further details. Alternatively, contact me via my Talk page or privately via e-mail. Regards, John Stephenson (talk) 19:16, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Chris_Day&oldid=960051"