User talk:Drew R. Smith: Difference between revisions
imported>Peter Schmitt |
imported>Drew R. Smith |
||
Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
:: I guess that one of the reasons might be that lists should not be merely collected automatically, but be conciously edited and organized by an author (for better value). Maybe someone can tell us more about it? <br> As far as the succession lines/boxes are concerned, I am curious if and how others will comment them. [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 11:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC) | :: I guess that one of the reasons might be that lists should not be merely collected automatically, but be conciously edited and organized by an author (for better value). Maybe someone can tell us more about it? <br> As far as the succession lines/boxes are concerned, I am curious if and how others will comment them. [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 11:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
:::I can see the concern with categories. At WP, I've seen articles on one subject end up in categories on a comletely different subject because one of the templates used automatically appends it. In my defense, I ''was'' editing and organizing the contents of that category consciously. But again, I can see the issues that could arise, and will stop. | |||
:::Again, the succession boxes have been in use long before I got here. I doubt anyone will have much to say, if at all.[[User:Drew R. Smith|Drew R. Smith]] | |||
:::On second thought, I'll take a look at the catalog subpage, and see if I can fit the info into that. I do think the successor and predecessor need to be clearly set apart from the text.[[User:Drew R. Smith|Drew R. Smith]] 11:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:57, 8 August 2009
The account of this former contributor was not re-activated after the server upgrade of March 2022.
The account of this former contributor was not re-activated after the server upgrade of March 2022.
Where Drew lives it is approximately: 18:31
Hawaiian alphabet
Drew: I use IE 6 as my browser. I know there are later versions ... but I like what I have. In any event, in the second sub-section of Hawaiian alphabet about the letter xOkina, the x does not render as anything but a small square ... which means that it is a character that my browser cannot read. Is there anything you could do about that? Does it render on other browsers? If you can't do anything about it, then so be it. I just thought you might want to know.
As for getting Hawaiian alphabet nominated for approval, I noted in your posting to Larry, that you thought it fit into 2 of our workgroups ... yet its Metadata template only has one category specified, namely Linguistics (added by Howard Berkowitz). It would be helpful if you could add a second valid category because approval nominations must be made Editors in the categories listed in the Metadata template. Adding another valid category means there might be more Editors eligible to nominate your article. (Please note that I said "valid" category.)
Just as background, when I wrote my first few articles, it was over a month before anyone even commented or suggested edits to them ... and it was even longer before someone finally nominated one for approval. So patience is required. As CZ grows, there will be more Editors available.
I hope you find this helpful, Milton Beychok 17:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what I can do about the character not rendering properly. As outlined in the article, it can be replaced with
'
, or`
, but for the links to work properly I have to use the realʻ
character. Perhaps I can change the links to `Okina. Did that render properly for you? I will wait for your response before making the change.\
- Yes, `Okina renders okay for me. Milton Beychok 17:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, I'll change it in the article then.Drew R. Smith 17:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, `Okina renders okay for me. Milton Beychok 17:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- And as for the workgroups, I'm not entirely convinced it belongs in anthropology. True, anthropology has a written language section, but the majority of the workgroup is dedicated to things entirely unrelated.
- There is no doubt in my mind that my article won't be nominated for along time, but I felt it was ready, and wanted to get the ball rolling. I didn't mean to seem impatient.Drew R. Smith 17:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- Also, to answer your question about other browsers; Yes, it renders on all four browsers I use (IE 8, Google Chrome, Firefox, and Opera). On a seperate note, if you ever do decide to upgrade browsers, might I suggest Opera?Drew R. Smith 17:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I think I changed them all. Could you look over it for me please? It probably sticks out alot more on your browser than it does on mine...Drew R. Smith 17:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm still working on it (hawaiian pronunciation). Which browser are you using... the original set-up was atrocious on mine... take careDustin Bowers 05:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- I actually use four of the most commonly used browsers (IE8, Google Chrome, Firefox, and Opera) to make sure my edits look ok. The article was created in IE8 and looked ok in firefox and opera. I did not check google chrome. What browser are you using?Drew R. Smith 06:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thats what I'm seeing in IE8...Drew R. Smith 06:23, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, thats a little better, but now it just looks like a list. And another thing to note, it looks alright in monobook, nut in pinkwich5, the default skin, the categories appear next to the last table.Drew R. Smith 06:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm using Safari. Some prose around the table would go a long way to reducing the list-itude. We could revitalize the text I deleted for that purpose. Glad we got the ball rolling. Dustin Bowers 07:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, thats a little better, but now it just looks like a list. And another thing to note, it looks alright in monobook, nut in pinkwich5, the default skin, the categories appear next to the last table.Drew R. Smith 06:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thats what I'm seeing in IE8...Drew R. Smith 06:23, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
No worries about ball-dropping. I have been fairly inactive myself. I would be happy to help move this forward. Diphthongs are probably the next target, maybe some fleshing out as needed. Or do you think it is ready now? Dustin Bowers 19:00, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, what did you have in mind? If I remember correctly we already have a chart with the diphthongs on it.Drew R. Smith 00:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Welcome & reply
Hi Drew, a belated welcome to CZ! I'm always really glad to see new active people. I might have answered more quickly but was travelling and offline for an unusual amount of time.
Milton answered on my behalf correctly (people think they can do that--go figure!--but they usually do so correctly so I don't actually mind). For our policy regarding approval, see CZ:Approval Process. --Larry Sanger 02:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey, no problem on the belated-ness; it happens. It's pretty cool that you're willing to stop by and welcome the new people. It shows, at the very least, that you are a better leader than most. Drew R. Smith 05:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
King K
Righto, Drew, he's on my to-do list for tomorrow - Ro Thorpe 01:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. By the way, I haven't heard anyone use "righto" in awhile, and it made me smile. Drew R. Smith 09:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Categories & Line of succession
Hi Drew, you are contributing here about as long as I. So I am surprised that you do not yet know that categories are used for administrative purpose only. For lists (of kings) /Catalogs subpages to appropriate articles are used. In your case, probably Hawaii/Catalogs/Kings or similar. (See CZ:Categories)
Concerning the "Line of succession" I do not know what CZ policy is. My personal opinion is, that they bloat up a minimum of information that could be given simpler and better in one sentence. Probalbly, in most cases, it need not be given at all: If the corresponding catalog is well-organized and commented an in-text link at an appropriate place (e.g., from "eleventh") would be sufficient and more appropriate.
Peter Schmitt 11:08, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- I had no idea about the categories. I guess I'll go ahead and tag them with a speedydelete template. Thats a shame though, they're so much easier to use than those catalogue subpages...
- As for the lines of succession, I have always liked having them stand apart from the text. Being able to view all the hawaiian heads of state from Pili to Governorn Linda Lingle is much simpler than having to search the text for a link that may or may not take you where you want to go. Also, the succession box isn't new, nor is it unused. All I did was change it to use the {{box}} template, and make the color customizable. If you go to {{succession box}} and check the "what links here", you can see that many articles already incorporate this.
- I do agree that the succession box is a little bloated, and could stand to be toned down a bit. I'll take a look at it and see what I can do.Drew R. Smith 11:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- I guess that one of the reasons might be that lists should not be merely collected automatically, but be conciously edited and organized by an author (for better value). Maybe someone can tell us more about it?
As far as the succession lines/boxes are concerned, I am curious if and how others will comment them. Peter Schmitt 11:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- I guess that one of the reasons might be that lists should not be merely collected automatically, but be conciously edited and organized by an author (for better value). Maybe someone can tell us more about it?
- I can see the concern with categories. At WP, I've seen articles on one subject end up in categories on a comletely different subject because one of the templates used automatically appends it. In my defense, I was editing and organizing the contents of that category consciously. But again, I can see the issues that could arise, and will stop.
- Again, the succession boxes have been in use long before I got here. I doubt anyone will have much to say, if at all.Drew R. Smith
- On second thought, I'll take a look at the catalog subpage, and see if I can fit the info into that. I do think the successor and predecessor need to be clearly set apart from the text.Drew R. Smith 11:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)