User talk:Mahanga/archive5

; Archives
	archive1 (Sept. 2, 2004 - Jan. 16, 2006)
	archive2 (Jan. 16, 2006 - Feb. 11, 2006)
	archive3 (Feb. 12, 2006 - April 1, 2006)
	archive4 (April 2, 2006 - March 12, 2007)

Welcome to my discussion page. -- Mahanga.
Click here to leave me a new message

Welcome back[edit]

Welcome back :) — Deckill er 02:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto! We've missed you! At WP:1.0 we've made a CD while you've been away, it comes out in a couple of weeks. It has Antarctica on it! Cheers, Walkerma 03:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 1.0 project is a vast maze of pages now! Let me know if you need a guide. The CD looks a bit like this, but with an open source (GPL) offline search engine/reader. The assessments have indeed really taken off, and WikiProjects are forming on a daily basis, too. We are getting a new bot to start picking out suitable articles from the 300,000+ articles, we should be doing more tests next weekend. The COTF is still going, and we have made some progress. Feel free to pitch in with anything you fancy, if you're ready. If not, it's still great to have you around again. Walkerma 04:23, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excitement! Welcome back! That brought a smile, goodness. Glad to see you back! Wikipedia is better for it. -- Natalya 19:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Films Thank You[edit]

As a member of the project, I would like to thank you for your past contributions to the project. Would you like to continue to receive the monthly newsletter? --Nehrams2020 04:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP 1.0 update[edit]

Hi, sorry I never got back to you last night. In answer to the questions:

Is no more work needed for the 0.5 release, besides internal tidying and whatnot?
Too late even for tidying! It's already on its way to the factory for production of the CDs! :)

That MartinBot looks neat. That will help tremendously with the 300k assessed article. I was wondering, is the MartinBot planned to find appropriate articles for the 0.7 release, together with individual reviews? Or is it for 1.0?
It's for 0.7. We will be testing out different ideas (various algorithms, etc( in the next few weeks, then use it for real article selection over the summer. I had a long Skype chat with Martin last weekend, he seems to know exactly what to do and how to do it.

I'm a little confused in the Review To-do list. It mentions both Core Topics and Vital Articles, which seem to have mostly the same articles, but only Core Topics has been worked on. Is the focus on Core Topics?
The infrastructure for 0.7 is still very messy. Much of it was copied over from 0.5 but not really updated. Another person was going to head up this release, but they've pretty much disappeared. I'm trying to take over the reins, but I only have so much time. We reviewed all core topics for Version 0.5 (all but a handful are on the CD), that's why they were worked on. VAs were not reviewed, so we still need to do that. The overlap is probably because the same person (Silence) largely wrote both lists.
Lastly, where can I find the statistics for total assessed articles?
The best page is here, which also lists all of the projects participating in assessment. I see we now have over 380k! Cheers, Walkerma 16:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ~~Gflores~~ Mahanga, can you attend our IRC meeting on WVWP on Sunday? We're planning on focusing on article assessment of "orphan" articles (no WikiProject) in the coming months, but we need to plan some strategy. On a related note, if you want a crash course in the 1.0 bot assessments, take a read of Tito's excellent blog on the subject. Cheers, Walkerma 21:19, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Environment wants to say thank you[edit]

On behalf of the project, I sincerely thank you for helping us setting up the assessment scale. Here's something to cheer you up...

I was planning to give you the first ever WikiProject Environment's barnstar File:Environment Barnstar 1.png but it isn't finalized yet. So instead, take this one

Thanks[edit]

I was wondering why "Motto" wasn't working on the Denton, TX page. I forgot it had to be lowercase. Good catch. --Ntmg05 02:08, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another question[edit]

Did you use Outriggr's script when you test the assessment system? Cause when I add the code like {{environment|class=stub}}, I have to manually update the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Environment articles by quality statistics and Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Environment articles by quality doesn't update itself when I add tag manually. But from what I see in edit history, you simply add the code and it miraclly updates both pages by a bot. OhanaUnited 03:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does the bot get activiated only when there're changes (assessments) or will it checks everything every day? I added a total of 8 to the stats table manually. Will it double-count the # of articles in each rating? I apologize for bothering you so long and ask so many questions. OhanaUnited 05:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Michigan10[edit]

Thanks. User:Michigan10

FF7[edit]

Thanks :) — Deckill er 00:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citizendium, thanks...[edit]

Where exactly is a good place to ask more people for feedback on essays? This isn't exactly policy, so would Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous) be appropriate? I don't normally read these large community discussion places myself (oops), so I don't know where exactly to put it. --Merzul 20:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we need the external link as it is already on the essay page, but other than that, your text was very nice. And I'm probably going to sleep now (or very soon), so it will be interesting to see what the page looks like when I wake up. --Merzul 21:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks! --Merzul 21:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously I don't like the direction it has been moving, but I don't know what are the views of our community. It seems the essay has attracted Wikipedians, who are perhaps more fond of Citizendium, while passionate Wikipedians don't care that much. Perhaps, that explains the direction it is taking. In any case, the "Family friendly" section was always a little joke for me, I think it might be better to remove it, since clearly that was not constructive criticism or anything for us to learn from. More like one section to strike back for all the irrelevant and childish criticism that I otherwise ignored, such as "On Wikipedia, NPOV is on hold for many articles" (paraphrase), and so on.

But in the end, I don't want us having to spend time maintaining an essay, there are real articles worth working on :) So what would be a good thing to do now? --Merzul 10:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for you guidance on this issue, you have been very kind and supportive. What really made me happy was that many nice Wikipedians like yourself read the essay and like it, so in some sense it has already served its purpose. I will look at it once in a while and make sure it doesn't get completely out of hand. I don't really care that much about Citizendium, but I have nothing against them either, it was interesting to know how they are doing things. In particular, why on earth do we not have stable versions for our featured articles already? :) --Merzul 16:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I Liq Chuan[edit]

How did you know that text was copyright? i didn't like to revert until i'd asked you. Cheers, Jonomacdrones _(talk) 16:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ratings - any comments?[edit]

Hi. Recently you rated two articles I contributed to: Raymond Premru and Robert Spano. You assessed both as "Start" class. First, thanks for checkin 'em out; as a newbie, it's cool to have active & experienced Wikians looking at my stuff, & from your contribs it looks like you're doing heroic work rating lots of articles. I'd be real grateful though, if you get time, for any comments in addition to the rating...I've put in alot of effort trying to make both of these articles as comprehensive (while concise) as possible, consistent w/ NPOV and the availability of source-able info, & I'm a bit stuck as to how to further improve them, so I'd welcome any input past "Not useless," and "Substantial/major editing is needed." If you get time to comment here or at the articles or my talk page (whichever you prefer), please feel free to be merciless :-). thx --Turangalila (talk) 07:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back so quickly. I'll try & work in your ideas. The Premru is kinda brief -- the available lit is scanty. Unfortunately your notability rating of "Low" is probably right. I'm hoping the creation of the article itself might eventually scare up info from folks w/ access to sources I can't get to -- I tried to use the talk page to solicit that. We'll see...

I'm still getting the lay of the land viz a viz the various feedback channels: WP:RFF (listed the Premru there but the page seems kinda dead); WP:GAC (didn't know 'bout that one -- is it kosher to nominate one's own work?); Peer Review (haven't tried); the Bio Project's separate Peer Review (listed the Spano here & already I've gotten a bunch of useful feedback in addition to yours); perhaps best of all is just bugging individual users like this!

Thanks again. --Turangalila (talk) 19:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty of copying your comment from Talk:Robert Spano over to the peer review, mostly for my own convenience in seeing all the feedback in one place. Hope that's cool. Turangalila (talk) 02:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of countries by population in 1907[edit]

That list is so disorganized, that it's hard to tell exactly what deserves to be in a table or not, but your table looks really good. I'm no expert, but I didn't notice anything wrong with it. I think that it ought to replace the list on the page, although we should preserve the raw data somehow. Anyway, good work. -- Renesis (talk) 04:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive[edit]

Thank you for your contributions! -- WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive 16:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For your tireless and endless efforts in assessing biography articles, WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive hereby awards you The Working Man's Barnstar. 16:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

		The Golden Wiki Award
		For your exceptional contributions to the WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive, WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive hereby awards you The Golden Wiki Award. 16:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Phelps DUI[edit]

I left a note on the Michael Phelps page indicating agreement with what you wrote, and giving reasons.

It seems that the DUI section should be removed.. Gacggt 20:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The same person keeps putting back that section; don't know how to handle it - it does seem to create an incorrect impression; made these points on the Phelps discussion page, but seemingly to no avail. Gacggt 22:28, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don´t delete links[edit]

Please don´t delete the links in the Disambiguation pages, as you just did in Leader. --ometzit<col> 15:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)--ometzit<col> 15:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:MOSDAB. --Mahanga (Talk) 03:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]