User talk:Blahma

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Intel International Science and Engineering Fair[edit]

by all means, add to the article! just curious, what country did you represent at ISEF2005 phoenix? PeregrineAY July 3, 2005 11:11 (UTC)

welcome[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 21:00, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

Selected Anniversaries[edit]

Hello, Blahma. Thank you for your suggestion. Battle of Austerlitz should have been featured on the MainPage yesterday. I wish I had seen your msg earlier. I've just moved your msg to Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/December 2 so that I can see it next year. The next time you have a good anniversary to propose for the MainPage, please leave a msg on the talk page of "Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/Month Day#" for that day. I usually check the talk page when I update each day's template. Thanks. -- PFHLai 21:34, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikics template[edit]

Hi Blahma! I've just created a new template to indicate English Wikipedia users who also contribute to the Czech Wikipedia.

Template:User wikics

Feel free to add it to your userboxes if you like it (and if you actually contribute). Happy Easter. Daniel Šebesta (talkcontribs) 13:01, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Positive-definite matrix[edit]

Thank you very much for correcting my error on positive-definite matrix. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 13:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Czech Wikipedian's notice board[edit]

You are invited to join Wikipedia:Czech Wikipedian's notice board! The Czech notice board can be used for discussions on Czech-related topics; to plan your Czech-related projects; and ask for, or offer assistance for Czech-related subjects. Editors are encouraged to sign their nickname on the list of active participators. --Thus Spake Anittas 02:22, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Entropa.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Entropa.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Entropa-detail.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Entropa-detail.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Entropa-detail-rectangular.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Entropa-detail-rectangular.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

File:Entropa-Bulgaria.jpg[edit]

If you have an opportunity, would you be able to get a version of File:Entropa-Bulgaria.jpg, taken from the same alignment and now covered up (for before, and after comparison). Many Thanks, —Sladen (talk) 17:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's a good idea. I will go to Brussels tomorrow, although I am not sure if I will have the opportunity to go to Justus Lipsius. Otherwise, I would try to find another opportunity soon. Blahma (talk) 17:58, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Entropa[edit]

Updated DYK query On January 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Entropa, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 07:10, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

euro[edit]

Hi there,

Just a quick note to let you know I have reverted your recent changes to Euro; in my opinion, this contribution does require to be sourced. If you need help adding references, please do not hesitate in asking.

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 07:03, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello Miguel.mateo, I have added the sources now directly into the article. First, I thought it would be enough to have the fact sourced in the article Germain Pirlot itself, but now I realize that it needs to be duplicated also in the Euro article. Note that I also own a copy of the letter (referred to in Germain Pirlot) which is the first level source in which the EC thanks to Pirlot for his suggestion. If that would be necessary, I can either add that source to the Euro article as well, or even publish the copy somewhere so that others can check it, but for now I consider the news article (which makes a reference to the letter, among others) as a sufficient source for the information. Thanks for your care and cooperation. Blahma (talk) 12:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I think you recent additions are great and we do not need to add any more sources. Thanks for your quick reply and good addition to the article. Miguel.mateo (talk) 02:45, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 21[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Conference on the Application of Esperanto in Science and Technology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Espero (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:22, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zamenhof-Esperanto object, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bust and Place (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Good talk[edit]

Definitely is something we working at WP:MED need to look at with the collaboration with TWB. Here is our progress with the medical articles Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine/Translation_task_force/RTT With the overview here Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine/Translation_task_force. Another issue we have is that the translators are not used to MediaWiki markup and break it form time to time. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 07:02, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Concerning wm2013:Submissions/Reproducing a featured article into other languages by coordinated effort[edit]

You had a question "was something alike before?". I want to remind (tell) you about CoSyne. Unfortunately, the project is ended and I can't see a working instrument. But the idea was similar and good. Infovarius (talk) 12:13, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

March 2014[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Microsoft Office, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Codename Lisa (talk) 18:27, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for bringing the SYNTH rule to my attention, because in spite of having edited for almost 10 years (though mainly on eowiki and cswiki), I have not heard about it so far. Still, after reading the description of the rule, I cannot understand in which way my edit might be considered a synthesis, i.e. original research.
The two statements that consitute the sentence "Microsoft Office 2010 [is named] Office 14.0, because [version] 13.0 was skipped [link to triskaidekaphobia]" are
A: "Microsoft Office 2010 is named 14.0 [in contrast to the previous version which was 12.0]" (that information was already present in the article before my edit) and
B: "triskaidekaphobia is a common reason for skipping number 13" (this can be found in the Wikipedia article on triskaidekaphobia).
The new piece of information in my edit is implying a relation between A and B.
However, the implied relation of A and B has, in my opinion, been properly sourced and the statement does appear as a whole in the source, cf.: "The company skipped 13 for superstitious (i.e. fun) reasons." In a related article, I have even discovered an additional source, in which the skip is put into relation with the superstition even in the article's title ("Microsoft to skip “unlucky” Office 13"). The latter source quotes a Microsoft employee as having said: "but that’s is an unlucky number so we’re going to skip Office 13 and call the next one Office 14". In your opinion, why does this fail to qualify as reliable sources publishing the same argument in relation to the topic of the article? --Blahma (talk) 22:09, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for taking the time to write the reply and your due diligence.
I wouldn't have reverted you if you had supplied the APCMag source. The source claims to have interviewed with Jensen Harris, Group Program Manager for Microsoft’s Office User Experience Team, so we can at least attribute it to a certain person.
The source that you inserted, however, is Paul Thurrott's personal blog and reflects his own opinion. He didn't claim to have interviewed with anybody and this Microsoft fan does not himself go out there to interview with people. He just has seen the jump from 12 to 14 and assumed it was for either superstition or fun. If he had supplied a source, he'd have become a secondary source, something that Wikipedia loves. But he hasn't, therefore, his blog has become a primary source for a personal opinion (OR); it is already a WP:SPS. WP:NOT#OR has more on this.
Again, thanks for the due diligence.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 19:24, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello again, and thanks for the patient and detailed explanation. I have now put the fact back with this second, "better" source. Obviously, the two other wikis I have been active in follow lower standards, because I have never seen such a deep analysis of sources like the one you have just demonstrated, nor have I seen someone trying to reconstruct the thinking processes of a source's author while evaluating its credibility. Thank you for providing links to further reading on the policies valid at this wiki. Also, unlike you, I am not a subject matter expert and I am not native to the English-speaking world, so it's not that straightforward at all for me to tell the credibility of "winsupersite.com" and "apcmag.com" compared (they might easily be blogs both, if judging only by domain name and website design).
Most importantly, however, when including the number 13 statement and quoting winsupersite.com as source, I was just copying a piece of information that was already present (same fact, same source) in another article – which you have also been editing in the past – Microsoft Office 2010. Actually, it had been there, "unremarked" (until I replaced it today, following your judgement), for more than 5(!) years – although it used to say "presumably" for the first few months – and the supposition that 13.0 was skipped because of triskaidekaphobia has even been a part of the article from its very beginning (7 years).
I know that Wikipedia will never be perfect and that there are still things in it that should not be there, but I point to that edit history in order to further justify the good faith of my edit. Because, believe me, it really feels somewhat uncomfortable if you just copy a sourced sentence from one article to another (believing it ought to be there as well and that you can't break anything by doing so) but your edit gets reverted immediately and you are told that you have to choose your sources more wisely next time. I do not believe that you meant to hurt me, but it is getting more and more difficult for me to imagine how a newbie could make a useful edit (other than fixing a typo) if the level is set that high. But that'd be already for another discussion and English Wikipedia probably does not need to attract new contributors so badly as the Czech or Esperanto ones.
Anyway, I appreciate your care of the Microsoft related articles here and thank you for your willingness to discuss these "cultural differences" with me here. Regards, --Blahma (talk) 22:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
You are welcome. I remember having removed the sentence in Office 2010 article. But I don't know when it came back. (Or maybe the day that I removed it, my change wasn't saved. Well, hard to tell.)
But you said something that I think I must comment on: "Trying to reconstruct the thinking processes of a source's author" isn't what I did. It is a dangerous form of original research. I just asked two questions: What is the source? What is the source of the source? In case of APC, the second question's answer is: Allegedly, Jensen Harris. In case of Paul, however, the second question has no answer. But, yes, we did investigate about the credibility of Paul's website and how he gathers his information. Now, we do know that whenever he does not supply a source for himself, the information has come from himself.
Oh, and by the way, you don't need to put talkback notice in my talk page every time you reply here. Your reply appears on my watchlist.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 03:55, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Monkey Day, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Monkey Business. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

I have "fixed" the link, but please see my comment for this edit. I am not knowledgeable enough about English idioms to dare adding "monkey business" as an alias into the lead paragraph of mischief, so the sentence in the disambiguation page making a relation of monkey business to mischief still remains the most explicit information that Wikipedia can provide. --Blahma (talk) 09:39, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of ACTIVE[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on ACTIVE requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. The Dissident Aggressor 17:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Dee Voon[edit]

Very nice investigation. DGG ( talk ) 08:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I made this discovery using a dedicated algorithm to discover possible hoaxes that I had made for this purpose, being inspired by another recently discovered hoax. Following this discovery, I have assembled a small team of volunteers willing to check more suspected articles. Therefore, more discoveries may come soon. --Blahma (talk) 09:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Ah, that explains the 'we' in your prod. Keep up the good work - there's bound to be more out there still that have been overlooked for years, but are b***** obvious when the right eyes look at them... Peridon (talk) 12:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

for your work on Morgan Dee Voon. An added point is that neither Morgan nor Dee are very likely names for a girl in Moravia at that time. Morgan is a Welsh name, and has only comparatively recently been used by females (apart from the legendary Morgan(a) le Fay), and Voon doesn't look right for that area either - possibly Dutch or Asian (Thailand, Indochina etc). Double e I don't associate with the languages of what is now the Czech Republic. And as you said, 'very little is known about...' is a killer. Why do they put that in, and emphasise the fact that nothing is known about it? Peridon (talk) 12:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

You are welcome and I am glad that you have found my discovery interesting. In my argumenting, I wanted to stick only to factual proofs, but linguistic assumptions definitely play a part too. I actually happen to live in Brno, Czech is my mother tongue and I am conversant in German. My guess is that "Dee" and "Voon" are puns on the noble ranks "de" and "von". "Morgan" might sound alike the German word "Morgen". --Blahma (talk) 12:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I have added the page to List of hoaxes on Wikipedia, where it ranks 11th by length of existence. It needs an administrator to properly archive the page using the instructions provided there. Could I ask you to do this, so the article's text is visible again for archival purposes? --Blahma (talk) 13:11, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I hope I've done that right. I've also removed her from Talk:List of female scientists before the 21st century/missing articles which appears to be a list of articles to be added somewhere. Found it by accident while dredging up the hoax article. I've linked to the archived article in the table of hoaxes. BTW do you agree with my 'linguistic analysis' of the name? Peridon (talk) 17:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for accepting the task. Please move the page to Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia/Morgan Dee Voon (remove the placeholder "HOAX TITLE/" that you have included in its current name), unprotect the old names and protect the correct ones. I agree with your reasoning on the etymology of the names. I have never heard of anyone called "Morgan" in Czech or Austrian context, particularly of the 19th century. --Blahma (talk) 19:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Knew I'd get something wrong... Sorted. Protection seems to follow the move. I also reckoned she'd be 'Voonova' if it was a Czech or Moravian name, just as Pešek becomes Peškova and Navratil becomes Navratilova. (I have met a non-notable Navratil, and had the pleasure of meeting a definitely notable Pešek.) Peridon (talk) 20:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
After the move now, everything seems OK. I have written up a short story about this discovery for my user page. You are right that in Czech she would be Voonová and that is also how I mock nickname her when talking about her fate to my peers these days. Just take notice of the accute diacritical mark that makes the last vowel sound longer; and that Czech identity actually covers both Bohemian (from Bohemia) and Moravian (from Moravia) and that only the first of the three is also a language. There has been a famous female tennis player called Navrátilová. As for my part, I did not know before that Morgan was of Welsh origin. --Blahma (talk) 22:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 25 February 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #147[edit]

Tech News: 2015-10[edit]

16:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 March 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #148[edit]

Tech News: 2015-11[edit]

15:18, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 March 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #149[edit]

Tech News: 2015-12[edit]

15:14, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 March 2015[edit]

.

Wikidata weekly summary #150[edit]

Tech News: 2015-13[edit]

15:09, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #151[edit]

Tech News: 2015-14[edit]

15:18, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost, 1 April 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 01 April 2015[edit]

VisualEditor News #2—2015[edit]

VisualEditor-logo.svg
Did you know?

With Citoid in VisualEditor, you click the 'book with bookmark' icon and paste in the URL for a reliable source:


Screenshot of Citoid's first dialog


Citoid looks up the source for you and returns the citation results. Click the green "Insert" button to accept its results and add them to the article:


Screenshot of Citoid's initial results


After inserting the citation, you can change it. Select the reference, and click the "Edit" button in the context menu to make changes.


The user guide has more information about how to use VisualEditor.

Since the last newsletter, the Editing Team has fixed many bugs and worked on VisualEditor's performance, the Citoid reference service, and support for languages with complex input requirements. Status reports are posted on Mediawiki.org. The worklist for April through June is available in Phabricator.

The weekly task triage meetings continue to be open to volunteers, each Wednesday at 11:00 (noon) PDT (18:00 UTC). You do not need to attend the meeting to nominate a bug for consideration as a Q4 blocker. Instead, go to Phabricator and "associate" the Editing team's Q4 blocker project with the bug. Learn how to join the meetings and how to nominate bugs at mw:Talk:VisualEditor/Portal.

Recent improvements[edit]

VisualEditor is now substantially faster. In many cases, opening the page in VisualEditor is now faster than opening it in the wikitext editor. The new system has improved the code speed by 37% and network speed by almost 40%.

The Editing team is slowly adding auto-fill features for citations. This is currently available only at the French, Italian, and English Wikipedias. The Citoid service takes a URL or DOI for a reliable source, and returns a pre-filled, pre-formatted bibliographic citation. After creating it, you will be able to change or add information to the citation, in the same way that you edit any other pre-existing citation in VisualEditor. Support for ISBNs, PMIDs, and other identifiers is planned. Later, editors will be able to improve precision and reduce the need for manual corrections by contributing to the Citoid service's definitions for each website.

Citoid requires good TemplateData for your citation templates. If you would like to request this feature for your wiki, please post a request in the Citoid project on Phabricator. Include links to the TemplateData for the most important citation templates on your wiki.

The special character inserter has been improved, based upon feedback from active users. After this, VisualEditor was made available to all users of Wikipedias on the Phase 5 list on 30 March. This affected 53 mid-size and smaller Wikipedias, including AfrikaansAzerbaijaniBretonKyrgyzMacedonianMongolianTatar, and Welsh.

Work continues to support languages with complex requirements, such as Korean and Japanese. These languages use input method editors ("IMEs”). Recent improvements to cursoring, backspace, and delete behavior will simplify typing in VisualEditor for these users.

The design for the image selection process is now using a "masonry fit" model. Images in the search results are displayed at the same height but at variable widths, similar to bricks of different sizes in a masonry wall, or the "packed" mode in image galleries. This style helps you find the right image by making it easier to see more details in images.

You can now drag and drop categories to re-arrange their order of appearance ​on the page.

The pop-up window that appears when you click on a reference, image, link, or other element, is called the "context menu". It now displays additional useful information, such as the destination of the link or the image's filename. The team has also added an explicit "Edit" button in the context menu, which helps new editors open the tool to change the item.

Invisible templates are marked by a puzzle piece icon so they can be interacted with. Users also will be able to see and edit HTML anchors now in section headings.

Users of the TemplateData GUI editor can now set a string as an optional text for the 'deprecated' property in addition to boolean value, which lets you tell users of the template what they should do instead (T90734).

Looking ahead[edit]

The special character inserter in VisualEditor will soon use the same special character list as the wikitext editor. Admins at each wiki will also have the option of creating a custom section for frequently used characters at the top of the list. Instructions for customizing the list will be posted at mediawiki.org.

The team is discussing a test of VisualEditor with new users, to see whether they have met their goals of making VisualEditor suitable for those editors. The timing is unknown, but might be relatively soon.

Let's work together[edit]

  • Share your ideas and ask questions at mw:VisualEditor/Feedback.
  • Can you translate from English into any other language? Please check this list to see whether more interface translations are needed for your language. Contact us to get an account if you want to help!
  • The design research team wants to see how real editors work. Please sign up for their research program.
  • File requests for language-appropriate "Bold" and "Italic" icons for the character formatting menu in Phabricator.

Subscribe, unsubscribe or change the page where this newsletter is delivered at Meta. If you aren't reading this in your favorite language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you!

-Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk), 18:50, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #152[edit]

Tech News: 2015-15[edit]

15:41, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 April 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #153[edit]

Tech News: 2015-16[edit]

16:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 April 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #154[edit]

Tech News: 2015-17[edit]

15:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #155[edit]

Tech News: 2015-18[edit]

15:10, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Support request with team editing experiment project[edit]

Dear tech ambassadors, instead of spamming the Village Pump of each Wikipedia about my tiny project proposal for researching team editing (see here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Research_team_editing), I have decided to leave to your own discretion if the matter is relevant enough to inform a wider audience already. I would appreciate if you could appraise if the Wikipedia community you are more familiar with could have interest in testing group editing "on their own grounds" and with their own guidance. In a nutshell: it consists in editing pages as a group instead of as an individual. This social experiment might involve redefining some aspects of the workflow we are all used to, with the hope of creating a more friendly and collaborative environment since editing under a group umbrella creates less social exposure than traditional "individual editing". I send you this message also as a proof that the Inspire Campaign is already gearing up. As said I would appreciate of *you* just a comment on the talk page/endorsement of my project noting your general perception about the idea. Nothing else. Your contribution helps to shape the future! (which I hope it will be very bright, with colors, and Wikipedia everywhere) Regards from User:Micru on meta.

The Signpost: 29 April 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #156[edit]

Tech News: 2015-19[edit]

15:08, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #157[edit]

Tech News: 2015-20[edit]

15:38, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #158[edit]

Tech News: 2015-21[edit]

15:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2015[edit]

Quixotic plea[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 04:20, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-22[edit]

16:12, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #159[edit]