User talk:Amalas/Archive 7

Hi,

It's only now I've been able to access wp. (I'm from the Philippines and we're having problems with the internet, due to the Taiwan quake.) I have no objection to the deletion. I did not even remember creating that template :) Anyway, if I find any use for it anytime soon I'll just put it back. Peace and happy new year! --Bentong Isles 03:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Amalas - I noticed your sfd noms for Tamil lit and India lit stubs, and that reminded me of {{Classical Tamil-stub}}, which has been lurking under the {{lit-stub}}s and has 41 articles in it and an associated project. Any opinion on whether this too should be sfd? Thanks - Her Pegship (tis herself) 21:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

What I've done once or twice in the past in cases of a stalemate at SFD is propose a compromise movve, see if you get any bits. In the case of Cluj-Napoca, if we were going to split Romania's stubs geographically it would be by county, not city, so perhaps changing this to Cluj County stubs would make some sense. In the case of Dharmic religion stubs, given that there are not many stubs but it would make a reasonable parent, perhaps keeping it as a templateless category would be reasonable. Suggest both these things (or something similar) at SFD and see if you get any bites. Grutness...wha? 23:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello. First, let me point out that it would have been very good of you to have posted a notice on my talk page concerning the proposed deletion of several templates and categories related to the WikiProject Cocktails. It should have been easy to tell that I was the primary person responsible for creating, maintaining, and even using them by a quick check of the edit history.

Secondly, it would have been nice if you had discussed it with me BEFORE going through the motions of deletion. I am a very reasonable person, and I always try to do things the right way if there such a way to follow. Had you contacted me, I would have been very happy to work with you to try to come up with a solution that worked for everyone. Now, I am stuck having to defend something that's broken so that well over 300 hours of hard work in December and January (and check my edit counter if you question that) gets horribly fouled up.

These templates and categories are crucial to the work I and a few other people have been doing to improve, cleanup, and purge the articles related to mixed drinks and glassware. This has been such a huge task, that not all the articles have even been tagged yet. Also, you point out that only 24 articles fall within some of those categories, and that's true for two reasons: (1) when something gets added to the cocktails-micro list, it gets dealt with quickly, and (2) not all the articles have been classified and tagged yet.

The cocktails-expand is a badge of progress. Articles that get improved out of what we have narrowly defined as a regular stub get promoted to expand on their way to becoming a full article. Basically, there are four levels of articles: (1) micro-stubs that need to be removed (our top priority right now), which are essentially nothing except a recipe and possibly one other notable piece of information. These are usually in clear violation of WP:NOT:IINFO, but contain information that could be appropriate if moved to better places. That is what we are doing. (2) regular stubs are a bit better than that, usually containing referenced historical or pop-culture notability. They aren't good, but they aren't horrible. (3) expands are articles that have been improved, but really could use a bit more polish. They might still consist of half recipe information (which is bad), but they have a good base from which to expand. These are cross-listed to the regular articles for expansion category as well as our own category. (4) full articles receive no tags, because they are in fine shape.

I see that some WikiProjects use a rating scale and a priority scale within their WikiProject Banners added to talk pages. I see that as a better way to go eventually. But these articles are (well, were, because we are making good headway) in such bad shape, that would have been a fruitless endeavor to try when we first started out (besides, I didn't know about it when I first started this initiative).

Finally, and I am aware of self-references and how they should be avoided, that tiny bit of extra promotion at the foot of the articles has helped to bring a few other people to the project through awareness. I have attempted to keep the templates as non-self-referential as possible.

The original cocktail-stub template was not created by me. I just tweaked it, using our standard icon, and pointing to a stub category within our WikiProject space. I did not see the need to list the stubs in two places, and since the Project members were the ones doing the cleanup, it seemed more logical to have the stubs listed in project space. It also kept stubs, micros, and expands together in a single, easy to view and access location.

I do remember reading in some of the WikiProject guidelines that we are in fact supposed to keep Wiki-Project related information within categories specifically titled "WikiProject", so as not to pollute the main Wikispace. I also thought that such spaces were largely sacrosanct, and not subject to outside interference, unless such works were interfering with Wikipedia. I really do not see how our micro and expand categories would be doing that.

Here are some ways I can see fixing things.

1. We move the micro and expand templates to the talk page, out of mainspace.
2. We update the stub tag to use the preferred category location instead of the WikiProject location.
3. We delete the WikiProject Cocktails (stubs) category if it offends (though we find it highly helpful).
4. Work on replacing our kludges (micro and expand) with a proper ratings system, to be phased in by March 1st.

If those changes are made, is there any reason to proceed with deletion of the WikiProject Cocktails categories and templates? After all, we do try to keep them low-key and unobtrusive. We never meant to break any standards. We are just trying to help improve Wikipedia for everyone. And so far, I think our results speak for the effectiveness of our efforts.

Please do not disrupt hours and weeks of work. But, if you feel duty bound to do so, please at least help us to transition to other methods that are acceptable. And please feel free to reply here. I prefer that conversations stay together for easier readability. Thanks! --Willscrlt 23:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• I do apologize for not notifying you directly regarding these templates. When I put things up for deletion that involve a WikiProject, I almost always notify that project in general (as opposed to the creator) because I feel that it would be more likely to catch the eye of someone who would be involved.

• I understand that you put a lot of work into these templates and categories. However, you have completely disregarded the stub proposal process that typically should precede the creation of said templates/cats. The whole point of WikiProject Stub sorting is to organize all the stub templates/cats into one place for the entirety of WP to use.

• We have general naming guidelines and conventions that we use so that all stub templates/cats look the same so they are easy to identify and use. Category:Cocktail stubs follows the convention, while Category:Cocktails (stubs) does not. You can look at our thousands of other stub categories and you can see what I mean. Also, templates and categories should not have that much verbage. Compare say, {{1990s-horror-film-stub}} or {{UK-journalist-stub}} or Category:New Zealand stubs or Category:Japanese actor stubs or any of them. There are specific guidelines at WP:STUB (under 'creating the stub template/category') that show how they should be created and used.

• I am NOT proposing the deletion of {{cocktail-stub}} and Category:Cocktail stubs. I thought I made that clear in the debate. I was merely listing them their for sake of being thorough. That way people could see everything that was involved, what already existed, etc. Since you are already using {{cocktail-stub}} on most of your articles, there is no need to change anything. {{cocktail-micro}} can easily be changed over to {{cocktail-stub}} using WP:AWB. There isn't a huge load of those and it will hardly take any time at all. What I'm trying to say is that I'm not undoing hours and hours of work. It should be a simple fix that I think will simplify the amount of work that your WikiProject will have to do in the long run. Instead of having 3 templates and 3 categories to deal with, you will have only 1 template and 1 category.

• {{cocktail-expand}} turns out to be a bit out of my scope at SFD. It seems like more of a job for WP:TFD, so the debate will have to take place there. I was trying to keep everything together in one discussion at SFD, but really, cocktail-expand isn't designed for stubs. Unfortunately, I don't have much knowledge in that area, so I will have to defer to TFD regarding that.

Anyway, I hope I addressed all of your points. You might also want to check out "Grutness's Guide to Stubs" on my user page. It has a couple bits about WP:WSS that I really like and hopefully illustrate some of my points better. Thanks for all your input. Have a great day and happy editing! ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 02:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I have moved your cocktail related listings from MFD to TFD and CFD. Those other forums get more editors versed in templates and categories then MFD does, as these were new listing I did NOT close the debates. The debates are now on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 5 and Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 January 5. Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 05:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello. As a person interested in cocktails and/or the WikiProject Cocktails, you may be interested to know that a name change is being considered for the WikiProject from Cocktails to Mixed Drinks. Please add your opinions to the discussion and vote. Also, check out the recent changes to the WikiProject area. Consider becoming an active Participant. Thanks!

On a more personal note, thanks for helping with the mess I created with the templates and categories and all. Naturally, you were right, and in the end I am happy you did what you did. But, in the future, if you could work with me informally to correct any mistakes you see, it would sure help keep my stress and sanity levels at a more healthy state. I'm more than willing to change things as necessary to do stuff the right way. I just hate being placed in a reactive mode instead of a proactive one. Anyway, thanks again! --Willscrlt 09:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you 'splain what that major edit is about? Some of it doesn't make any sense to me, like the removal of the documentation (indeed, of all of the <includeonly> vs. <noinclude> distictions), the addition of things like '*Peopld" (which I'm guessing is a typo), etc. I s'pect that there is some kind of general all-stubs template overhaul going on, which is cool I guess, but I'm not sure I agree with every change here. As for the general effort to clean up the cue sports stubs, I'm all for that; sorry I did not chime in when these things were up for discussion (was on a real-world-stuff-to-do wikibreak), and the changes so far are pretty much in the direction we were going with all of this. I'll try to further clean it up later, after Billiards is renamed Cue sport (which is after the article gets a substantial rewrite), and so on. It's all in-process, though a little stalled over the holidays. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 11:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

NB: I've posted a re-reply on my talk page. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 21:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Would you mind if I used the basics of your userpage skin on mine? I am finally getting around to creating my page but would like for it to have some color, and my test atempts have not been very appealing! When I first saw yours it stood out nicely. — CobraWiki ^{( jabber | stuff )} 20:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi thankyou for your concenr about the stub category. I admit it was created prematurely but it is because I am working gradually as part of wikipedia project missing films. I have been working on Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/List of missing Argentine Films and am only as far as AL!! I have been researching each one and removing unotable films to leave a complete list of missing films. It will reach 60 very soon and will far exceed this ten times. I like to create the articles with relelvant info and then go through and expand and research each one afterwards. And I have created 45 new film articles in a month -category was nearly empty with a wealth of other work I would love to work quicker. Please have patience with the process - it is all part of the massive Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article projectErnst Stavro Blofeld 18:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I have tagged many films that were not stubbed categorize correctly e.g argentina-stub. Replaced with the MUCH needed Argentina films stub and added a few more as I am doing which will be expanded fuller later. I now count 62 films Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

There are now over 115 Argentine film stubs in that stub category. Trust me there will be 300 odd in no time at all. I want to get them started and then research each one in detail afterwards. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Please reconsider your attention to emerging and new stubs and categories in Western Australia. These are being developed by energetic wikiprojects in WA with experienced editors (and admins if that means anything). Please read the comment and protest carefully and look into the extensive discussion surrounding them. Rest assured, redundancy are being reduced at the projects. There can be no merit in unworthy nominations. These would be beyond your scope of deletion nominations, I'm certain. Your reply would be appreciated. Yours faithfully Fred 16:02, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I am a little put out that you have not taken a moment to respond to my comments. I am fairly new around here and largely unaware of the forms of governance on wikipedia. Is it a case of no correspondence will be entered into? Perhaps a standard response to pests like me would be more in keeping with the wikipedia culture. Are you self appointed? What forms of review of take place? Your statements seems to imply that you, as an individual, have the authority to make decisions. I had thought the decision was being made below your introductory comment and that your role was to mediate this. Please reply to my possibly naive or erroneous interpretation of this process, or direct me to relevant guidelines. Faithfully Fred 15:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

"If there's a bona fide WikiProject involved, the proposal pretty much always gets approved. This is one of those cases where it's better to ask permission than to ask forgiveness." and other statements help to clarify your position, thankyou. Despite my failure to state the question in terms you understand, you have more than adequately answered it. You are obviously a very bright person and perhaps your nominations generally have merit. Our community was forced to defend its own work from an individual. In my opinion this is an unacceptable situation. In this instance you have wasted a lot of editors time away from more enjoyable activities on wikipedia. Fred 10:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Your welcome mate. If you browse through many of the stubs you'll see many of them are really good starts. I am working on List of Argentine films first organized by decade so we should get a brilliant idea of the cinema of each country by decade and the direcotrs, actors release date etc all organized by a global film box. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/List of missing Argentine Films: A-L. I am working on filtering a fine list of Argentine feature films to add to wikipeida. and am only in the infancy for Argentina let alone the rest of the world!!! I then aim to start all of the worthy actors, direcotrs, cinematographers, editors, producers etc by country and films by country and then working on expanding each film and biogrpahy into really full detailed articles. I am beginning with Argentine the letter A. I wish I could recruit like 10 people to help me out!! An I have been occupied with Randall and Hopkirk starting all the episodes and writing main article from practically a stub and creating list of actors and starting them!!! WOW I'm busy!!Ernst Stavro Blofeld 19:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Also as the films are started I will be starting a few actors and direcotrs such as Gerardo Romano and José A. Ferreyra -names that keep popping up but I'll go back and start all the missing red links like this setting them up for large expansion and development. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 20:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Dear Amalas,

you closed the discussion on the Abkhazia template, opting for delete, I want to ask you to reconsider. I have three reasons for this, first:

Consensus was not (yet) reached

According to the guideline, after 10 days, a rfd may be closed if consensus has been reached. There was thus no need to close the rfd and indeed there was no reason either. A majority of the votes was certainly cast in favour of deletion, but, as the guidelines say:

simple vote-counting should never be the key part of the interpretation of a debate.

Rather, it is the force of the arguments and the extent to which counterarguments are provided that determines true consensus. As Wikipedia:consensus tells us:

"Silence equals consent" is the ultimate measure of consensus.

You will find that the many arguments I provided opposed to deletion encountered mere silence. How can consensus have been reached if the debate is not yet over? In stark contrast to my arguments, several of the users voting in favour of deletion did not provie any reasons at all. You will also find that the users Kober, Ldingley and Clevelander, voting in favour, all have a userbox on their user page stating that they are opposed to the aggressive seperatism of Abkhazia (Cleavelanders version leaves out 'aggresive'). They are of course entitled to their opinion and they are free to vote as they want, and I will assume good faith, but the fact that they share this political convinction not quite irrelevant to the matter at hand, combined with the fact that they do not appear to be members of the WikiProject:Stub Sorting and combined with the fact that they did not explain their vote (apart from Ldingley's accusing me of POV) helps to underline the fact that mere vote counting does not necessarily reflect consensus.

No valid motive existed for deletion

It seems to me that a succesful vfd not only requires consensus, but also an actual motive as to why a template ahould be deleted. However, none of the reasons suggested on the stub types for deletion page page applies:

Possible reasons for the deletion of a stub type

They are not used in any article, and their category is empty

no

They overlap with other stub categories, or duplicate them outright

no

Their scope is too limited - As a rule of thumb, there should be at least 50 appropriate stubs in existence

There were some 55 atricles in the category when it was deleted with potential for many more.

The stub category or template is misnamed. In this case, make this clear when nominating and propose a new category or template name. Note that - in the case of a template but not a category - it may be more appropriate to make it into a redirect

no

They are malformed, misnamed, or deprecated redirects

no

Instead, the only two reasons given were:

We generally don't have stub templates for disputed territories.

This is blatently not true, there are stub templates for Western Sahara, Taiwan, Transnistria and Palestine and similar arrangments exist for the island of Cyprus and Nagorno-Karabakh. Precedent therefore actually favours a template for Abkhazia.

The template would have a very high risk of causing edit wars.

This is an unfounded assumption. There have been no edit wars over articles related to Abkhazia as of late and while there has been dispute, I wouldn't say there have been edit wars over the stub templates of the other disputed regions. And even if the danger existed, no policy is written that rules out stub templates that risk edit wars. Indeed, no such policy could exist as NPOV is a cardinal guideline on Wikipedia, no other principle can overwrite it, and as I will argue below, the deletion of the Abkhazia stub results in a breach of NPOV.

The existing situation is a flagrant breach of NPOV

Abkhazia is a disputed territory and it would not be proper for Wikipedia to choose sides. And yet that is exactly what is happening in the present situation. Stub articles on events, people and objects partaining to the (unrecognised) Republic of Abkhazia are tagged with little Georgian flags. The situation really is comparable with the scenario of all Israeli stubs having been tagged with Palestinian stub templates, or the scenario of all Palestinian stubs having been tagged with Israeli stub templates. Please note that the Abkhazia tag was not the opposite of the current situation. I do not want to have a "Republic of Abkhazia tag" be employed exlusively for articles Abkhazia. Rather, What I proposed was a neutral Abkhazia stub tag, featuring both the Abkhazian and the Georgian flag, or, if that is not acceptable, featuring only a map. Note that the existence of an Abkhazia tag in no way implies a stance in favour of Abkhazian independance. Stub tags also exist for Quebec for example, merely because it happens to be a culturally and politically distinct region, something that applies to Abkhazia as well. The situation where Quebec can have it's own stub tag but Abkhazia cannot is quite absurd.

In closing, what I ask of you is that you respond to each of my arguments, I ask that you explain to me why you feel consensus had been reached, what the direct motivation is for deletion and why this does not lead to a situation where NPOV is being violated. Or, failing that, you are of course very welcome to agree with me. sephia karta 23:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for closing that one - the consensus reached appears to be broadly acceptable as it means we can include roads in other cities in the new stub cat. I've edited the content of the stub to read "This Western Australian...", but I didn't want to touch anything else in case I foiled some standard system to deal with such things :) Orderinchaos78 15:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Another comment at section 'stubs, what else'. Ta, Fred 16:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

help

Hi, i need your help

One of your admin, Doc glasgow , is threatening me and blocking my account. We have a dispute in the definition on living person.

Please contact me for more information.

Thanks

Senatorto—Preceding unsigned comment added by Senatorto (talk • contribs)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 17:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, and congrats on your promotion! Per this discussion, I'm dropping a friendly note to some of the recently-promoted admins requesting help with speedy deletions. I am not an administrator, so if you don't feel comfortable diving into deletions - or if you need more info - please don't come to me, but I'm sure that Cyde Weys would be happy to guide you if you want to help. Any help is great, but I'm sure that Cyde and others would deeply appreciate it if you could put the page on your watchlist and do a bit of work there on a regular basis? Maybe weekly? Thanks in advance! Oh and if you're already working away on CSD please disregard this message; it's not meant as a slight against any hard work you're already doing. Cheers! Anchoress 18:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Thought you might be interested in joining the LGBT WikiProject - straights are welcome, too :) Take a look around, and if you are interested, sign up? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 18:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:53, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

As you had the "fun" task of closing the SFD last time, in the interests of transparency I draw your attention to this musing I've just added to Grutness's talk page. Alai 18:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:02, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

You may be pleased to know we now have 313 films in Category:Argentine film stubs -many of which can soon be expanded into full articles. We now have getting on for 400 films (370 approx.) in Category:Argentine films -compared to just 9 films back in December!!! I kept my word about there being 300 articles soon enough.Ernst Stavro Blofeld 21:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)