Contents

User talk:Womble: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:48, 23 January 2006

If you're going to put a stub notice on a page, it'd be helpful if you'd put a more descriptive one than just {{stub}}. Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types is the list of all current stub templates/categories. --Mairi 22:09, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing... I didn't really think it was an issue. I've been adding Nuttall articles recently, and it seems like there are "stub-hawks" out there who swoop-in within a minute or two of me creating an article and put in an appropriate stub. I figured that they knew the list better than I, so.. ;-) Womble 05:55, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really an issue; it just makes it easier for stub-hawks like me :P You're probably right that it isn't worth the time to wade thru the list (especially for lots of articles); just thought i'd point it out incase, say, lots of the articles are on a similar topic and there's a obvious stub type for that. --Mairi 19:46, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Nod*. Actually, the stub list is a little confusing -- for example, some stubs have a capital letter in them, and some use abbreviations. I guess that it's difficult to make some kind of "standard" syntax for everything, especially because we don't want a thousand different types of stubs. Womble 21:19, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Any good articles you've been editing recently? — λ 03:13, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nope! Womble 04:04, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, maybe a few. Check out Merry andrew.

check out Duchess of Angoulême. Maybe when the Nuttall topic is a title that several people have held, there should be a disambiguation page rather than a redirect that picks out only one? (and anything with a diacritic in it should really have a "plain vanilla" redirect pointing to it). - Nunh-huh 06:01, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did the plain text already, just something to keep in mind if you run across any more! <g>- Nunh-huh 06:17, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank for the helping to prune the NIST DADS list. While most articles on the DADS are very brief, they sometimes do contain a list of (high quality) external links that can be used to improve the respective articles on wikipedia. When you prune an article could you copy those external links to wikipedia or add a {{DADS}} template to the wikipedia article if there are more than, say, three external links. Cheers, --R.Koot 18:43, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and the see also section can be copied too. --R.Koot 18:45, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the definitions (not entire articles) are copyrighted by CRC Press. If a definition is copyrighted by CRC Press this is clearly indicated. All of the see also and external links sections are in public domain. --R.Koot 19:27, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Who's Lambda? --Gethzerion101

So I want to put some info up about a court case, how would I do that?

The case is The Wilderness Society v. US Fish and Wildlife Service, 353 F.3d 1051

--Gethzerion101

I see that you created the redirect. My concern is that Wikipedia should not put its imprimatur on plain flat-out errors made by Nuttall, not to mention errors that are due to improper transcription. My position is that the annotated record in the history could serve as proof we have equivalent coverage; it's really unlikely someone will regenerate the lists from scratch and check for blues, surely? David Brooks 20:58, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have been pruning the Nuttall lists again :-) With now roughly 500 articles left, do you think it might be better to put them all into one big list (like, ten sections with 50 articles each)? It would improve overview, pruning, and more people might see the "hard cases". --Magnus Manske 20:42, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Womble, I was just wondering what "Dukhobortzi" means on the Doukhobors article... is it an alternate transliteration? A reference to the name the Orthodox priests called them by? It'd be nice to explain it in the article. Zach (wv) (t) 00:40, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think I know what to do for a spelling section... not quite an area of expertise, but I have read a little about them... Thanks for the addition. Zach (wv) (t) 02:54, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You had asked:

I was kind of wondering why the category wasn't showing up anymore... Please let me know if there are any more changes that will affect Wikipedia:Project_Gutenberg_author_list. thanks.

The Project Gutenberg author lists will still continue in the same way, as far as I am aware. The category was removed from the template as the consensus was that it did not add a needed functionality, and only added clutter to the list of categories. If you have some reason that such a category would help you, please mention it at Category_talk:Gutenberg_author_list Andrew Sly 02:11, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for your wasted time and effort with the category. As compensation, I offer you the brand-new "Compare" links, to ease the comparison between a Wikipedia and a Gutenberg author entry. --Magnus Manske 07:29, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As for Gutenberg <=> Wikipedia lists, while practical, these would have to be kept up-to-date manually. As I pointed out to Andrew, keeping a copy of "What links here" for the template and makeing a diff once in a while will show new template additions nicely. That doesn't directly give the Gutenberg name, but it's easy enough to find out. Should be much less work in the end. --Magnus Manske 20:13, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A "save" button would be complicated, as MediaWiki puts some invisible stuff on its edit pages to prevent bots (as which the "Compare" page would qualify) from editing. There are ways to replicate this, but rather worksome ones :-( As for "spot the gutenberg template", you mean one that already exists in the text? But the "Compare" page will alert you if the wiki text already contains a "gutenberg author" template. --Magnus Manske 08:14, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your efforts in adding a gutenberg author template where applicable.

However, I though I'd mentioned that I've deleted the template that you had added to James Baldwin (writer).

The wikipedia article is about James Baldwin (1924-1987). The author by that name represented in Project Gutenberg is James Baldwin, 1841-1925 who appears to have written about historic personalities and legends.

If you have any uncertainties, please feel free to ask me, or leave a note on the Gutenberg author list pages, as others have done. I will get around to checking them. Andrew Sly 23:40, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Womble, I would appreciate any input you have for my Request for Administrator. Thanks so much --Reflex Reaction 21:24, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya -- I'm not sure I know you very well. Have you been working on the Nuttall Encyclopedia at all, or the Gutenberg Authors list? I'm just trying to get a feel for what work you've been doing. Thanks. Womble 16:52, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Well I've seen you around on WP:MEA, and thought you might be familiar with me from there. You can always check mine or anyone's contributions to see what they have or haven't done. I've worked mostly on the Catholic Encyclopedia and with the Hotlist and make the occasional contribution to 1911 or Nutall. Reflex Reaction 19:36, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the voting has officially closed, I would like to thank you very much for supporting my candidacy for adminstrator and as of 18:36, 28 October 2005 (UTC) I am an administrator. I will make sure to use the additional power judiciously and I welcome any comments you may have. --Reflex Reaction 19:08, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Womble thanks for your continuing work on the Nuttall encyclopedia --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 22:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I noticed the arrival of Gellert (dog). We already have an article on this legend under the more usual spelling of Gelert. I have expanded the Gelert article to include reference to this Nuttall encyclopaedia. Would you object terribly, therefore, if I turned your Gellert article into a redirect to the longer-established and probably more complete Gelert article? Thanks! --Telsa 16:53, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; duly directed. Good luck with the remainder of Nuttall! Telsa 17:09, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

They must have changed something, because I can't find it either. I did find it on Google, though. I put a link to it in the article: http://digital.lib.msu.edu/projects/cookbooks/books/grocersencyclopedia/ency.html — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-21 19:44

Heya Womble. About your Lohipedia request, I'm guessing the author was referring to low and high, in the context of performance. --62.189.96.213 16:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]