User talk:Quiddity

I usually watchlist talkpage threads for a few days, so please reply in original threads.

If you leave a new message here, I will probably reply here, unless requested otherwise.

"Attention and activity lead to mistakes as well as to successes; but a life spent making mistakes
is not only more honorable, but more useful than a life spent doing nothing." – George Bernard Shaw^[2]

"I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove anything!" -- Bart Simpson^[3]

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up
and hurry off as if nothing ever happened." - Winston Churchill^{[citation requested]}

a small bag of holding

This small yellowing sack, woven of bananafibre and buckypaper, currently contains: one copy of this week's newspaper, two photographs of cat noses, and the susurrus of neglected conversations ...

Template:Infobox classical composer

Hi Quiddity. Now that the new composer infobox has been moved to template space and survived an AfD, perhaps it's time to revisit the documentation? The admin closing the AfD made some construtive edits and made some suggestions in the edit summary. I think we really need to go further. For instance, I wonder if we actually need that many examples? Perhaps just keep Riley and Chopin and move the others to a subpage of some sort? There are other things that could be tidied up, too, without losing the sense of the arguments for a minimal infobox to be used minimally. Indeed, "less is more" is kind of the point... =) Any thoughts? --Jubilee♫clipman 22:06, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I completely agree (specifically and generally). I'll take a closer look once I get a dent into my watchlist check. -- Quiddity (talk) 17:43, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Will, I haven't a great deal of time at the moment either. Anyway, we should involve the Composers project folks, obviously (without dragging the whole bl**dy debate up yet again, if we can help it...). No rush, therefore... --Jubilee♫clipman 20:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Books

I get the definite impression that the above named project is more or less inactive, at least in terms of it as a group actually doing anything to improve relevant articles; its guidelines and such are another matter entirely. Maybe something should be done to try to generate some interest. I proposed some time ago that maybe we could try to find the top 100 or 200 non-fiction books, something along the lines of WP:BIOGRAPHY's "core" biographies or WP:NOVEL's top-importance rating. Would you have any interest in maybe working with me, as much as I am able to do so, to maybe try to reactivate the project? John Carter (talk) 21:46, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Very interested. I'll see you over at the wikiproject talkpage (sometime this week). :) -- Quiddity (talk) 03:32, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia books

Yo, Q. I think you might have a better idea of how to assemble books than I do. Walkerma suggested that I try to assemble a few for comparison purposes, but I personally don't think I am necessarily the best person to do that. Having said that, I do think that having a few "samples" around might be useful. To my eyes, there are maybe three basic types, and maybe having one of each available might work best.

• 1) the overview - this would be a biography of an individual, a history of a subject, maybe a how-to book, that sort of thing
• 2) the encyclopedia - this might be something similar to one of Scarecrow Press's "Historical dictionary of (whatever)" books. If you have access to any such, they are I think maybe the best examples of this type. They would tend to contain comparatively long basic "articles" on the primary subject, and then a large group of short entries on the various subjects of lesser importance associated with it.
• 3) other - because I can't think of what else to call them, or, at this point, of any particular examples.

Anyway, if you can think of any other kinds, let me know. If not, maybe, if I can impose on you, you might have a better idea of how to create example books of the first two types than me.

Oh, yeah, and I know I'm not as popular as the last guy, but I really have to question one of the "toys" you gave me last time. Gelignite suppositories. Really, really unsubtle. ;) John Carter (talk) 17:01, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Is it necessary/helpful to create new examples, or can we just draw on what is already available?

(I've never created a book either (oh, wait, I did, but it was just a test, and someone else created a better "official" version later , so I deleted it (User:Quiddity/Books/William Gibson if you'd like to glance. I don't recall how incomplete it was)) [I have a problem with parentheses. I'm getting it looked at... ;) ])

The only examples I've stared at for very long are Book:William Gibson, Book:Cats, and Book:Canada. They generally seem to be a selection from (or full copy of) the topic's footer navbox (eg Template:Gibsonian).

I'll think about your basic types idea once I've had more coffee...

Gelignite "cannot explode without a detonator, so it can be stored safely" in any area HMG sees fit. Should I have warned you to not ingest detonators? Even the drink should be safe. Really now Carter, I wouldn't try to kill off one of our best agents, despite the way you treat our equipment... -- Quiddity (talk) 18:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Time

It is part of the responsibility that anyone who has been around the site for a while, and who has certain positive qualities, should accept being an admin. You are calm, level headed, helpful, intelligent, polite, knowledgable and experienced. Just the sort of person who should accept the role. I'm sending you an email. SilkTork *^YES! 20:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Replied privately.

Veterinary terms

Hi. Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Animal and veterinary terms in Karimojong, could you check the deleted article, to see if there were any references in it? If there were, please userfy the article for me, and I'll try to determine where Wiktionary might want the content. If there were no references, then I don't have time for it. Much thanks :) -- Quiddity (talk) 23:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Done, User:Quiddity/Animal and veterinary terms in Karimojong; tag it {{db-userreq}} when you're done. Stifle (talk) 08:02, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Navigation RFC

In reply to queries at User talk:TheGrappler#Insights

I don't think you've got something ready to take to RFC yet but you do have sufficient community interest to hammer something more coherent out. To stop it degenerating, I think you ought to try and boil it down to a simple, clear, workable proposal - there have been more than 8 years of argument over all this and anything that allows too much complexity and nuance, is going to produce an incoherent discussion with no clear consensus. We both clearly think alike - I don't like simple solutions either, I'm far more holistic, and I like to see things in their context. But unfortunately the Wiki collective decision-making process doesn't work that way! What the proposal you present should be, I'm not sure. A proposal for a well-defined Index namespace and a statement of what should be moved there would be one idea but of course it isn't the only possibility. (Until someone pointed out it was a copyvio, we actually used to have an Index to Wikipedia articles by Dewey Decimal Code! Don't know if you remember the rows about that one?)

At some point I will be brave and suggest that Wikipedia should build a Micropedia based around an article description system like on Citizendium... but not yet :-) TheGrappler (talk) 20:30, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

replied at User talk:TheGrappler#Insights

Citizendium

I wasn't thinking about their workgroups actually! They're interesting but we do have effective counterparts here, and ours are probably more scalable (as they have to be!)

The "related articles" section does indeed correspond to a) navboxes, b) "see also" sections and (to some extent) c) links to Portals [we're not that big on portal links but on fr: wikipedia, they seem to be compulsory everywhere!)

But I think the CZ related articles sections are better for several reasons. They're more structured than our "see alsos" - often they are subdivided e.g. a section for basic treatment, other sections for more technically difficult articles or articles grouped by particular parts of the subject. That kind of structuring does happen on some of the larger navboxes, but navbox bloat is often described as ugly and they do get a fair bit of criticism. Finally the addition of the article descriptions makes their related article lists far more instructive to a user - some of our "see also" sections contain lists of names, which without further introduction, are largely useless to a reader who doesn't know who those people are.

I know what you mean about WP:LEAD and I do use popups, but actually it's my experience with popups (and seeing less-than-useful results on google searches!) that makes me think that CZ has got this spot on. What's needed is a clear definition of the article subject, and a brief summary if possible (sometimes e.g. for list articles that isn't possible, but a clear definition would be helpful; whereas for biographies there isn't so much difference between a definition and a summary!). Our leads are often too long to be useful for this purpose. Our leads also attempt to be all three of definition, summary, and introduction, and for worst offenders sometimes "place to cram other random stuff that doesn't fit anywhere else" - though that's a flaw of implementation not structure. If we attempted autogenerated disambiguation or "see also" sections using automatically extracted leads in the same way as popups, it would look awful. I really think they're onto something there and they don't seem to be making best use of it either! [For what it's worth, I think it's better if disambiguation pages are manually written - and that CZ are overusing definitions there - since the style can be adapted to make it clear exactly what is being disambiguated between the articles, rather than just what the articles are about in general... nevertheless I find that disambiguation pages are easier to navigate when you have popups installed, since seeing the fuller preview often makes it clearer which article is the one you want.]

Have you ever seen http://www.pepysdiary.com/ - that's a brilliant example of useful textual annotation. CZ would really benefit if they made hover-over definitions appear for their internal links in articles. One reason popups isn't implemented for the entire readership here is that it's a bit of a resource hog, I am not a technical expert enough to judge whether using CZ-style definitions would ease resource-strain and make the equivalent possible here, but it seems plausible. Another area it strikes me that definition fields would be valuable to a reader, is when using the internal search, browsing categories, or looking at special: pages.

CZ haven't explicitly produced a "micropedia" option where you can see all their definitions in alphabetical order but I suppose there's no particular reason to since nobody browses in that manner. They have essentially got all the material for one. (Special:Allpages with hover-over definitions enabled would basically be it, I guess.)

I wonder if something like that will ever be implemented here - I can't recall prior discussions about it, but I may not have been hanging around the right places! TheGrappler (talk) 17:20, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

replied at User talk:TheGrappler#Insights

Double-Tongued Dictionary

What the L? Why do you keep changing "Wrester" to "Wrestler"?[1] It's NOT "Wrestler." There is no L in the name, there never was an L in the name. There's even a note on the entry telling people not to spell it that way. Pay attention! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.91.230 (talk) 13:23, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Ack! My initial revert was because you undid my entire edit, in which I had added in 3 references, so I assumed it was either vandalism or a mistake. I should have checked closer the second time, and perhaps re-read the source I'd added. However, there was no note in the article until you added it, and it was spelled "Wrestler" when I made my first edit to the article. So it's not all my fault!

Thanks for following up. -- Quiddity (talk) 17:00, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Outline cleanup

I think I found a solution for country outline cleanup. See Outline of Saint Helena and its talk page. The Transhumanist 01:07, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Looks good. And is much much better than creating a slew of redirects to subsections of the main article. -- Quiddity (talk) 01:20, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

espalier page

I finally was able to log in using my name as my username. If I want to change how I am referred to on the espalier page can you tell me how? Andyvancleve (talk) 22:49, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

It took 6 attempts to log in

I am Andyvancleve my IP address is 74.67.19.152

Is there some way to change where I have used my IP address previously and replace it with my username instead?

I am partially paralyzed in my hands so I often flub the password. Its very difficult to get through the red tape.Andyvancleve (talk) 23:42, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Andyvancleve. -- Quiddity (talk) 00:30, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up...

...about my typo at Talk:Legendary. — AjaxSmack 04:20, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks on God of Carnage (film)

I am now engaged in a conversation with someone with the Film projects.IBS101 (talk) 21:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Spencer Wells

Hello, Quiddity. You have new messages at Drmies's talk page.
Message added 15:32, 12 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• BTW, I saw the JLB box on your user page and was pleased to see that it was indeed the acronym I hoped it would be; I'm reading a nice collection of his that includes The Aleph (I'd never read him before) and last night was thinking about writing the article for the concept--if Pokemon can be totally in-universe, then this should stand a chance also. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 15:35, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

first run at boldness and links tutorial

Howdy! Let me know if you have suggestions for improving this: File:Boldness and links tutorial.ogv.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 01:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Fantastic! Good pacing (for many demographics), clear and smiling voice, well-animated examples of the growing code-structure, and I grinned at the arrows-to-wikilinks slide. I have no suggestions for improving the existing content. :)

The only addition I can think of, is a high-speed example at the end, to show how little time it actually takes to complete an edit. A 15-slides in 5-seconds sequence, type thing. However, I'm not sure how difficult that would be with your software setup.

(I'm still stabbing at success with my microphone component... Stab stab stab!)

In later videos, we'll probably want to emphasize using the preview button, but that's an unnecessary complexity for this early core intro.

What software are you using apart from OOo? (shortlist format is fine - I can extrapolate :) -- Quiddity (talk) 04:40, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm using: Ubuntu 10.04 inside VirtualBox to make the screenshots (it might as well at least look like I'm using free software), cropping them with GIMP, OOo for the slideshow, Quicktime to record, iMovie to trim the beginning and end of the clip (and excise any mistakes/redos in the middle if necessary), then Firefogg to convert to ogg/theora. I had a lot of trouble with my attempts before I got this Mac with getting listenable sound; I had to extract the audio, de-noise it with Audacity and re-add it to the video, and even then it sounded terrible. Once I figure out how to get Linux on this machine, I'll test it to see it was hardware or software that made the difference.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 13:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

POV

I've moved the thread to Talk:POV#Privately Owned Vehicle so that anyone interested in that page can give feedback. -- Quiddity (talk) 17:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, thanks for the ISBN link. Good to know. Best wishes Span (talk) 21:38, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 October 23#MediaWiki:History short

Hi Quiddity. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/MediaWiki:History short, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 October 23#MediaWiki:History short. Cunard (talk) 06:49, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Outlines status report

Quiddity,

We're trying to get some sports-related outlines started/completed, to provide an example/inspiration to the various sports WikiProjects.

Currently under construction are:

• Outline of basketball
• Outline of cricket
• Outline of motorcycles and motorcycling
• Outline of tennis

These need help.

Other outlines undergoing substantial development recently include:

• Outline of British Columbia
• Outline of Saskatchewan
• Outline of forensics
• Outline of epistemology

An editor named Thruxton went the extra-mile with respect to the motorcycle outline, by developing and placing a template banner on talk pages of articles for which a link was included on the motorcycle outline.

I'm applying the concept to the basketball outline.

Your comments and contributions are welcome.

Just a heads up, The Transhumanist 00:32, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

What do you think of Outline of meteorology?

It's currently an excellent mid-range-quality/completion outline. The footer templates at Meteorology#External links would be worth going through, for missing items. With more content, and more structure, it'll be up to Outline of cell biology levels. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 04:08, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Outline of motorcycles and motorcycling is heading in that direction. The Transhumanist 00:48, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

help contents draft reply

Bobrayner has replied to a discussion in Help_talk:Contents/draft#A_related_issue:_The_first_step_towards_help (in case you missed it). Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 11:43, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Signpost update

Thanks, I forgot about it :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:23, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Outline WikiProject needs an overhaul

And I need your help.

If you undertake it, I'll be happy to assist. The Transhumanist 23:24, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Will do. Hopefully tonight or tomorrow. -- Quiddity (talk) 00:00, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

User_talk:Ocaasi#sidebar

cheers--Ocaasi (talk) 15:21, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Signpost

Hi Quiddity, I have seen you making small improvements to Signpost artices on various occasions during recent months, thanks for that! I was wondering if you would like to contribute more directly during the writing process, before publication? We could especially use help for the "In the news" section, summarizing media coverage of Wikipedia/Wikimedia. It usually has more than a thousand readers [2] and is linked in the Foundation's monthly reports, but unfortunately we are currently short on good writers for it, and two weeks ago we had to drop it for first time since May.

Even if you are not inclined to write a full story, a short summary of a news story or new research paper (may just be one or two sentences) can be very useful. Work on the section is coordinated in the Signpost newsroom, where there are some suggestions listed for the upcoming edition (Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-11-01/In the news - to be published tomorrow at some point during the day, but currently still empty...).

Regards, HaeB (talk) 22:05, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I'll add some pages to my watchlist, and will jump in if I can help. Probably not this week. (unless I consume far too much coffee tonight; though, with the screaming teenagers outside, that might just happen...) -- Quiddity (talk) 22:17, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks in advance! The upcoming ITN has quite a lot of material already, but some entries still need fleshing out and most need polishing. Especially with this issue, help is also welcome for "News and notes", which is still almost empty.

Regards, HaeB (talk) 21:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Outline of culture

Since the previous outline was renamed to "List of culture topics", I created this outline to fill the void in the outline set. I scoured Wikipedia with Google, and browsed manually, to find everything I could on culture in general. I hope you like it.

The topic list was just a stub, and a crappy one at that. So I've merged it (redirected it) into the outline, which is much more comprehensive.

The structure may need some work, as I wasn't sure where to put the elements, or even if they should be called elements. What is "cuisine" and "sports" in relation to culture? The Transhumanist 05:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Need help recruiting

My free time is about to dry up, and so I'll be scarce again for an indefinite period.

If the outline system is to continue improving, it is going to need some new blood.

Please help find some. The Transhumanist 05:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Quiddity. You have new messages at McDoobAU93's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

18:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Centrifugal force XKCD joke

Hello. I happened to remember this thread from a few months ago, and looked it up - it looks like it tailed off a short while after you said "I'd appreciate some sort of response to the points I've raised just above, before the link is edited out." What did you think to my comparison to Larson's "blah blah Ginger" cartoon? --McGeddon (talk) 19:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi. There is a pdf now freely available [3] of the more useful of the two The Physics Teacher mentions of this strip. It's part of footnote #3 (embedded just under figure #3). It's not a core part of the paper, but the authors obviously thought it was worth mentioning.

Regarding Ginger, if scholars consistently mention it (over 40 papers is a lot), then we could and should do so, too.

As far as concerns about opening floodgates, WP:OTHERSTUFF should cover that, and any addition at any other article would still need either prior citation, or some sort of consensus.

I'm glad we can discuss this calmly, now that W has left. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 19:51, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Can't find the page

I'm looking for the talk page for Special:Statistics, the page that comes up when you click on the article count on the Main Page. The Transhumanist 18:51, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't think there is one. Try Wikipedia:Statistics or Wikipedia:Statistics Department. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:38, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Which ones are the best?

Which are the best country outlines? The Transhumanist 21:45, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

You know them better than I. (Quick note, please put your signature in the same line as your comments. It's the standard! Thanks) -- Quiddity (talk) 23:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

The problem is, there are so many, that I can't remember them all. So I'll skim through them and start a list below. Let me know what's missing, and especially mark those that you don't believe fit their classification, so that we can explore any differences of perception. Here it goes...

Dismal:

• Outline of family and consumer science

Poor:

• Outline of performing arts
• Outline of cartography

Due to their extensive use of embedded nav footers, I don't know how to grade these:

• Outline of Africa
• Outline of Asia
• Outline of Europe
• Outline of North America
• Outline of South America
• Outline of astronomy

Good start:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of Knowledge/Drafts/Outline of tropical cyclones

Good coverage, and fairly clean:

• Outline of Akrotiri and Dhekelia
• Outline of Åland
• Outline of Somaliland
• Outline of artificial intelligence
• Outline of critical theory
• Outline of cryptography
• Outline of fiction
• Outline of forensics
• Outline of free software
• Outline of hydrology
• Outline of meteorology (place links from nav footer)
• Outline of mining
• Outline of nuclear technology
• Outline of photography
• Outline of space exploration
• Outline of the visual arts

Well-developed, but need touch up:

• Outline of bicycles (place links from see also section in the outline)
• Outline of Canada (remove infoboxes, after placing links)
• Outline of China (redlinks)
• Outline of military science and technology (footer block)
• Outline of probability (linked headings)
• Outline of transport (linked headings)

Well-developed:

• Outline of the United Kingdom
  • Outline of England
  • Outline of Northern Ireland
• Outline of Saint Helena
• Outline of British Columbia
• Outline of Saskatchewan
• Outline of agriculture
• Outline of anarchism
• Outline of Buddhism
• Outline of classical studies
• Outline of chocolate
• Outline of computer science
• Outline of epistemology
• Outline of festivals
• Outline of history
• Outline of library science
• Outline of motorcycles and motorcycling
• Outline of physical science
• Outline of sharks
• Outline of thought
• Outline of wine
• Outline of World War II

Well-developed, with good picture support:

• Outline of France
• Outline of Gibraltar
• Outline of Iceland
• Outline of Japan
• Outline of Taiwan
• Outline of Thailand
• Outline of architecture
• Outline of kayaking and canoeing
• Outline of water

Well-developed, fully annotated:

• Outline of cell biology

Well-developed, with full annotation and pics

• Outline of forestry (I think this one might be the "best of breed")

Let me know what you think.

The Transhumanist 03:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Redlinks in country outlines

I'm not sure what to do about the redlinked country outlines. The redlinks were removed from Iceland months ago. But yesterday I found that most of them had turned blue. It took hours to put them back in. The Transhumanist 03:29, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

A bit rough, but a nice start...

A big gap has been filled in the religious section of Portal:Contents/Outlines:

Outline of Judaism

I'm guessing it was IZAK's response to this: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#Outline of Judaism. The Transhumanist 22:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm having the same trouble with France as I did with Iceland

Outline of France was stripped of redlinks, and now it's taking hours to put those that have turned blue back in.

Just thought you'd like to know. The Transhumanist 06:01, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure? I can't see any link removals in the history. Ditto Iceland. -- Quiddity (talk) 06:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Crap, it's worse than I thought. I upgraded the country outlines in late May 2008 with an expanded skeleton (like this), and I apparently skipped some of them. I must have run short on time or something. Now I have to track down which ones I missed. Thank you for looking deeper. The Transhumanist 19:25, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Merge complete

Outline of geography - I like this new structure better, as it integrates everything (from basic topics) together as sub-branches in the topic hierarchy. The Transhumanist 05:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

The difference between prose articles and outlines

The Geography / Outline of geography pair now exemplifies the difference between prose articles and outlines very well. It would be extremely impractical to include the outline's material in the geography article, as the outline is almost twice its size. But, the outline would more than double in size if it were expanded into prose for insertion into the geography article. The Transhumanist 05:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Entering final content phase

Even though the previous phases are not anywhere near completion, it looks like we've moved into the last phase of manual filling and formatting. The outlines are evolving into a hybrid of topic outlines and sentence outlines. The form they are morphing into has now become obvious: structured glossaries. Though country outlines don't lend themselves to this form since they are filled with "Foo of country-x" entries, which are self-explanatory and for which descriptions would be superfluous.

I think the best approach for now is to focus on outlines of core (major) topics, whether they exist yet or not: cleaning up and completing existing outlines, and filling in the most blatant gaps in the collection with new outlines (preferably by recruits). On the existing outlines, I've been manually working my way down from the top, alternating with semi-automated tools (AWB & Linky) to implement improvements across the whole set or large portions of it.

Once the collection reaches 700 to 1000 well-developed outlines, I think it will be diverse enough to be useful as a general navigational interface to Wikipedia. At that point, I will probably feel comfortable with shifting over to development of software-enhancement of the outlines via outliner features. I would do so now, but the outlines need to be solidified (improved in quality) first, since it would be unwise to let them sit around in such rough form. The Transhumanist 05:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Paper house

Thanks for your help Re: this addition. Despite looking through WP:NOTE I wasn't quite sure how to confront the editor with regards this addition. Tomayres (talk) 21:40, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I've left further comments at the user's talkpage. Hopefully that helps. -- Quiddity (talk) 21:54, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Screencast - Screen shot wikiprefs1.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Screencast - Screen shot wikiprefs1.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:48, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Screencast - Screen shot wikiprefs2.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Screencast - Screen shot wikiprefs2.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:51, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Contents/Outlines

See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Contents/Outlines. ==SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:11, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Screencast - Screen shot wikiprefs2.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Screencast - Screen shot wikiprefs2.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 15:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Screencast - Screen shot wikiprefs1.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Screencast - Screen shot wikiprefs1.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 15:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Where oh where have you been?

You've been sorely missed. When will your wikibreak be over? The Transhumanist 07:24, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Contents pages navigation proposal

A proposal to add topical links to all of the contents pages has been made. As part of that proposal, the navigation bar at the top of these contents pages would look like this.

Overview · Lists · Outlines · Portals · Categories · Glossaries · Indexes

Reference · Culture · Geography · Health · History · Mathematics · Nature · People · Philosophy · Religion · Society · Technology

Please respond to the proposal, Portal talk:Contents#Adding topical links to contents pages navigational headers and footers, as you see fit. Regards, RichardF (talk) 13:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Category:Infobox Infoboxwatch template

Hi, back on 15 June 2008 you added the "The Infoboxwatch" template to Category:Infobox templates, which displays a CFD cleanup notice. This seems stale/wrong... ok to delete? Thanks, Rostz (talk) 14:22, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Robotics infoboxes

Hi

I am soliciting some opinions on my first attempts at designing infoboxes and wondered if you might have time to help.

I made a post a few days ago at robotic infoboxes concerning the first attempt I had started, an proposed expansion of the current Template:Infobox_robot.

As no-one has replied I was hoping that if you had time you might be able to have a quick look and perhaps comment on the discussions page.

Thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 18:42, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Outline collaboration

Here's the latest addition to the religion section of Portal:Contents/Outlines. Wikipedia has rich coverage on this subject. Very interesting, especially from sociological and historical perspectives.

• Outline of Sikhism

This is a call to all members of the Outline WikiProject and outline aficionados to help refine this outline. It needs annotations, missing topics added, and the entries in the general concepts section placed in more specific sections.

Come join in on the fun and get acquainted with members of the Outline WikiProject!

User talk:The Transhumanist 04:42, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

P.S.: I had no idea this religion was so extensive or that it had so many followers.

Tree shaping

There is a proposed Topic Ban for Blackash and Slowart on Tree shaping related articles at the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents As you have had some involvement with these editors in question, you may wish to comment. Blackash have a chat 00:02, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Quiddity,

You probably don't remember me, but back in August 2006 when I was a wiki-newbie, you welcomed me. I'm still active, having made over 8,000 edits, and have welcomed over 100 newbies myself. So I guess you've got 100+ "wiki-grandkids", if that makes sense.

I've randomly come across your name several times since, and you've always struck me as a sensible sort. Recently I've read of some valuable Wikipedians departing, and on a whim, I decided to check whether you were still active, and noticed you haven't edited this year. So I just thought I'd say that I hope you're well, and that I hope you come back soon. Though if real life takes you elsewhere, then I wish you all the best.

Also, I never thanked you for welcoming me. So... Thanks.

Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 15:48, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

p.s. I collapsed a few template notices above to keep your talk page looking tidy.

Use of colors

Hello there. Please see this suggestion of mine about a subpage of WikiProject Usability. Thanks! -- Hoary (talk) 07:43, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Please comment

Please comment at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(article_message_boxes)#Categories. I have updated my answer considerably. It is unfortunate that discussion in that whole large section which discussed so many important additions to the template was restricted to two people mainly. Debresser (talk) 15:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Tree Shaping -> Arborsculpture RFM 2

A second request to move the article "tree shaping" to "arborsculpture" has been opened. Since you have previously been involved in the subject, you may wish to participate in the discussion. AfD hero (talk) 19:20, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Your participation would be most welcome. Martin Hogbin (talk) 15:49, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

This user has been inactive since December 2010. --Elonka 15:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

List of English words containing Q not followed by U

Hi Quiddity,

I noticed that you did some good work on List of English words containing Q not followed by U in order to address concerns and save its featured list status from being removed. I am currently endeavouring to get the list up on the main page in the "Today's Featured List" section and certain concerns have been raised about the nomination here. Any help you would be willing to provide in addressing these concerns would be greatly appreciated.

Neelix (talk) 19:25, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Mystery

Please solve this mystery if you can...

On September 23rd, traffic to Portal:James Bond doubled, and has stayed at the new level since then. I can't figure out what happened.

See http://stats.grok.se/en/201109/Portal%3AJames_Bond

Traffic to Outline of James Bond stayed the same (though it was at the higher-level already), which leads me to suspect changes made somewhere in Wikipedia.

See http://stats.grok.se/en/201109/Outline%20of%20James_Bond

I'd like to find out what happened, in case it reveals helpful link placement tips that can double the traffic to outlines.

I look forward to your reply. The Transhumanist 22:19, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

P.S.: Quiddity, keep in touch.

hi ty

hi ty my name is daniela from Romania,no speak very good english I do not know if possible I can help I have three brothers and I have a very small house and poor all laugh at us and our home I have a sister 4 years a brother and a sister 9 years 17 years my mother works in Spain only to have money for food we get home we can do and expect if I can help reply to this email....dienutza_ubita2001@yahoo.com.txh ty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.81.81.65 (talk) 13:35, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Lists of Russians

Per your comments here, would you care to comment at Wikipedia:Bot_requests#Help_removing_a_template. There is an editor who seems to believe we need this template at the bottom of every article about every Russian. Thank you. 198.175.175.57 (talk) 23:41, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Calvino - Baron in the Trees

Hi Quiddity. An IP address editor (geolocated in Rome) continues to remove sourced info at Baron in the Trees despite my several attempts to make him/her understand Wiki policy on sourced info. This editor refuses to discuss the matter while repeatedly removing the info. It's now down to simple vandal editing on his/her part. I'd be grateful if you had suggestions on what to do. I'm ready to request blocking him/her but is that the best procedure? And if so, who should I contact? Thanks for your help. --Jumbolino (talk) 14:03, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Wikipediareflistoverlap.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Wikipediareflistoverlap.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

File:WikipediaScreenshot-AmboxAlignmentProblem.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:WikipediaScreenshot-AmboxAlignmentProblem.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Quiddity. You have new messages at Talk:Crayola.
Message added 23:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 23:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC)