User talk:William P. Coleman

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

Note: I've now relaxed from ultra-paranoid Faggot_Defcon Level 5 around Wikipedia to approximate Faggot_Defcon Level 3.6, so I'm starting to make corresponding changes here and in my user page -- including I'll probably stop self-describing as "faggot" for a while. I'll try to restore/archive the deleted messages soon. William P. Coleman (talk) 15:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you are![edit]

]


Wow!! Thanks!!! . . . And also -- also, also, also -- actually, the picture shows I'm way hotter than I thought! Why doesn't my mirror tell me these things???? I should be a lot more self-confident. . . . Uhhhh, actually, which of the two guys in the picture am I?
Seriously, though, Allstarecho, thanks!
Thanks too, BTW, for incidentally showing me how to use {{Clr}}. I've been looking for that. You seem to a reliable source of wikitech -- considering, also, the way you sign your name.
William P. Coleman (talk) 20:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Well gee[edit]

Even though you won't see it apparently, I never even realized you had replied above! But I hate to see you leave Wikipedia. You'll be missed and are definitely a flaming star! If you change your mind, drop a line on my talk page. ALLSTAR echo 21:24, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Hope you'll reconsider[edit]

Sorry it's been a bit of a disappointment. I hope you'll reconsider for the same reasons you teach and write. Good luck in all you do! Benjiboi 00:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I second that emotion. We at the LGBT Project need editors like you. It's very easy to become discouraged here, but don't let the bastard[s] get you down. Jeffpw (talk) 00:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Wow, I really take exception to that comment Jeff. Avruchtalk 02:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Really. Perhaps it wasn' directed at you but you might try empathizing why someone would feel as though there time and contributions at Wikipedia were just no longer worth it. You might try living your entire life as an outsider always hoping that the next homophobe with a baseball bats out to get their kicks doesn't find you, that the next boss doesn't fire you for being different as in too gay or too butch if you're a woman. Perhaps you'll consider that LGBT people tend to thrive online because we are generally treated as equals as long as no one knows we are LGBT; but once that info is revealed all manner of "interesting things" seem to take place. For those reasons and thousands of queer kids worldwide who deserve to live a life free of hate many of us choose to slog through the endless abuse and sophomoric vandalism. We patiently reference things that would seem to generate no questioning at all if the article wasn't about an LGBT person. I see the benefit now that we are continually playing the don't let it get deleted game but it does take the wind out of one's sails - so to speak. I hope that frustration is sometimes evident as I've yet to experience a day of editing at wikipedia where homophobia wasn't all too real. Benjiboi 03:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, I hope it isn't directed at me. I assumed it might be because all of Coleman's parting comments mentioned me specifically, but its possible it was a general comment. I won't pretend to understand the difficulty you or he have been through, it doesn't get much more privileged than my background I guess. Still, I am not and have never been among those who make life difficult for the LGBT crowd. I do my part (easy in Vermont...). Being seen as prejudiced for what I perceived to be fairly uncontroversial actions is a tough outcome for me, but I guess it is easier after all than living with the results of being the target of actual prejudice. Avruchtalk 04:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
It's an instance (I think) of the great gulf that can exist between the intent of an action and its effect. There was, previously, a raging war over userboxes, particularly those involving personal characteristics and beliefs. I was eventually on the losing side of that one, but I retained a statement of my reasoning. No Wikipedian should feel the need to check their identity at the door as the cost of admission to this project. I'm confident you intended no such thing, either here or at the AfD we both participated in, and what I say here is equally applicable to most Wikipedians, myself included. In this case, the effect seems to have been different from the intent, so (to me) it is up to you whether to alter the action so that its effect matches your intent. --SSBohio 15:34, 21 January 2008 (UTC) (another gayass Wikipedian)
You're absolutely right, and just a few minutes ago I withdrew the UCfD nomination. As I said to Aleta on my talkpage - the controversial and disruptive nature of an action is determined by those who it effects, not the individual taking the action. I was aware of the userbox controversy, but assumed because of the recent prior deletion of similar categories that it was a generally uncontroversial nom. I was incorrect, and the nomination became far more disruptive than I think the category could ever be alone. When the usercat issue is finally resolved it will have to have been tackled comprehensively without singling out any particular category to avoid potentially offending its members. Avruchtalk 15:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Queer Wikipedian usercat[edit]

Just recreate it and moot the DRV, I'd say. Its clear that the consensus on the issue may have changed or may not have been well established, so recreate it and let someone nominate it for deletion if they feel the need. Avruchtalk 14:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Again, I have to sincerely thank you for trying to be helpful. I do have some eventual contingency plans based on your suggestion, but for the minute I'm sitting back and letting the discussion evolve without me intervening more and polarizing more. It seems by now that if someone is just going to recreate the category, it should preferably be someone with a lot more experience than a newbie like me (though I'd certainly serve in the last resort). Meanwhile, some very obviously, perceptibly fair admins have joined in, and I'd like them to do their thing. I think that DuncanHill's participation has been great, and I'm encouraged by DGG's comments and even fairly inspired by the Wikipedia:Eguor admins group he belongs to. William P. Coleman (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi William![edit]

Since I've found you in the recent AfD on Adult-child sex not too opposed to the general idea to strengthen our encyclopedia with reliable, comprehensive, substantial, and essential material also on unpopular topics, and since you obviously have a basic grasp of German, I've been meaning to ask about your support.

A thought I've been harboring lately is putting up an essay within my userspace on the main source for my draft (which is Bleibtreu-Ehrenberg 1985/88) to one day maybe be moved to Wikipedia, WikiBooks, or WikiEssays. I'd once put this up on the German Wikipedia as an article and it held up for half a year, from May 2006 until January 2007, until someone on a personal revenge crusade removed it by means of an AfD (where votes were split 50:50 and of course most wanting to get it deleted did nothing more than point to their severe disgust, although that AfD actually lasted for 2 months before it was closed). This essay of mine was actually so influential that I found literal quotes lifted from it in a nation-wide newspaper endorsing them, that literal quotes were endorsed by a German General Medical Council, and just the same with an official brochure issued by an Austrian government department, I found my very own words in all those cases. Googling for it, I found that a number of people had saved personal backups of the article in various places on the web, and there also were several forums debating its content while linking to my article on Wikipedia.

So, I've been meaning to ask you if you'd be willing to have a look at my German essay after I'll have put it up in my userspace here on the English Wikipedia and tell me whether you think it's a good idea for me to translate it to English and for the time being leaving it as the draft of an English Wikipedia article in my userspace to one day maybe be moved to Wikipedia, WikiBooks, or WikiEssays. The basic idea of this essay of mine is a Wikipedia article on an existing work (Bleibtreu-Ehrenberg 1985/88), comparable to articles such as Civilization and Its Discontents and Dialectic of Enlightenment. --TlatoSMD (talk) 03:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. However, you must not have read my posts in that thread much at all. I repeatedly wrote there that I find adult-child sex repellent, and I even took some criticism because I refused for that reason to so much as read the article under discussion. Since I refused then even to read it, I certainly don't want to actively contribute to it in any way now. My support was entirely limited to the negative sense that I thought it was unfair to automatically delete the article -- and, further, I did advocate thoroughly revising the article to make it strictly NPOV and under no circumstances interpretable as even a possible limited endorsement of anything.
Please do not imply that you think I might be an advocate. I have no personal inclination to adult-child sex and I find it extremely difficult to imagine circumstances in the modern world in which it would be other than exploitative and harmful.
My participation in that discussion, as my comments clearly stated, was strictly limited to a desire to help Wikipedia -- by ensuring that it adhered to certain underlying general principles of fairness, objectivity, and cross-cultural awareness. Quixotic as I sometimes am, such generalities and principles are important to me.
However, adult-child sex is nonexistent on my radar; and if someone did bring it to my attention I think it should be stopped. William P. Coleman (talk) 16:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Your frustrations[edit]

Yeah, I know. But they deleted it because they thought it was an insult. --Gp75motorsports REV LIMITER 15:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Apology and Thanks[edit]

_____Notice_____

I am returning to Wikipedia.

Since I left Wikipedia, Avruchtalk has made obviously sincere attempts to explain that he did not intend prejudice, and he's made several gestures of reconciliation, of which withdrawing the deletion nomination was only one. There may have been mutual misunderstanding, but it's more important that there clearly was no malice, as there was none on my part. I accept his explanations, I thank him for his gestures, I bear him no ill will, and I apologize for whatever degree I was the cause of our misunderstanding.

My frustration with Wikipedia has therefore cooled down to just below the boiling point and I am returning. I hope soon to be back to normal, participating in the Novels project collaboration of the month and working on Modernist Poetry and its relatives.

I'll soon move this message to my talk page -- as soon as I figure out how to restore the talk page from the deletions I made. (I think I know how, but it'll be a great learning experience for me in Wikitechnique.)

I would like to very sincerely thank several people who spoke decently about gays or kindly about me during the discussion.

--Bill

William P. Coleman (talk) 15:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Original Barnstar[edit]

Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
For your efforts in improving the article Nausea (novel)
Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Man's Barnstar
For your efforts in improving the article Nausea (novel)
Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For the good efforts in the Nausea (novel)

I'll drink to that.

Updated DYK query On February 4, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nausea (novel), 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.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back[edit]

Thanks for joining my favorite project, WP:ROBO, and thanks for coming back regardless. My partner John is just great on the kinds of issues that were causing problems, and fortunately he now owes me a big favor, so I am very much hoping he will now get up to speed at Wikipedia and participate in the LGBT Wikiproject. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Dan, thanks very much for your kind message! I don't actually know what I can do in WP:ROBO. I signed up there mainly because I hoped to learn something about the topic. I'm deeply interested in cognition as a theoretical subject and am just starting a long-delayed software project on it -- kind of a proof-of-concept for some ideas. But, anything hands-on or hardware related (like actually building or using robots) is usually beyond me. I'll try to look around WP:ROBO and see what I can do. If you have any suggestions or requests for help, please ask. -- Bill William P. Coleman (talk) 18:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
You're most certainly welcome. I'm going to add some articles on WP:ROBO for the newsletter, and that may give you some ideas for how you can help...you have a very wide range of very relevant skills. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 19:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

sandbox[edit]

I have moved William P. Coleman/Achilles Painter to User:William P. Coleman/Achilles Painter. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Sorry! That's what I actually intended. Thanks for fixing it for me. Like my user page says, I'm new here -- so I do sometimes screw up. William P. Coleman (talk) 19:36, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:ROBO[edit]

William (do I call you William?), there is absolutely something you can do. After a lot of discussion with WP:MoS people, admins, and participants in other WikiProjects, I am absolutely convinced that we need to do things in a different way...namely, we need to "insulate" the "workers" on the WikiProject from anything and everything that gets in their way. Anyone who contributes to that goal, even if they've never seen a robot in their life, does more to make the project succeed than 10 new roboticist-participants. I will create a new category at WP:ROBO in the box on the right called "Copyeditors", that would be the place for you to peek in from time to time to see if there's anything you want to help with. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 20:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually...strike that, the link called "Admin's Edit Log" would probably be better...I'm wrestling with Jameson over keeping the page just as simple as possible, so I can't afford to create an additional link myself :) And...I'm spending a lot of time on this but I still quite having figured out where we're going from here, so I'm not sure how fast I'll get the relevant content into that link...keep an eye on it from time to time please! - Dan Dank55 (talk) 13:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your contributions, William, and btw, you've got mail. Also btw, I am right smack in the middle of a big hairy fight at WT:MOS. It's got math, drama, and politics, so you might enjoy :) - Dan Dank55 (talk) 17:37, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm enjoying helping out, and gratified if people are finding my changes useful. People that have encountered me around here will probably find this very hard to believe, but I actually hate drama and politics -- even though I've been doing a lot of both. In real life, I'm very work-oriented and team-oriented. If challenged, I'll stand up for myself -- and I'm especially sensitive and touchy if I think I or anyone is being discriminated against for being LGBT. But I don't like being pushed into acting like that. After all the drama I've been through (and caused) around here lately, I feel a powerful need to bury myself in work. . . . BTW: in answer to your question, friends call me "Bill." William P. Coleman (talk) 05:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Assessment issues at WP:ROBO[edit]

William, I have an idea, and there is a lot of support around Wikipedia for this idea, but Jameson is not so sure, please tell me what you think (email or my userpage, please).

After talking with people in a lot of wikiprojects, what I'd like to do about assessment is to let participants at WP:ROBO assign a grade of "stub", "start" or "B-class" to their own articles. I don't think there's any formal WP review process for these assessments. The higher ratings (Good, A-Class, and Featured) will still exist, and people who have been around WP a while and know what they're getting into will be encouraged to try for the higher assessments. We already have 3 featured robotics articles (including the portal), Jameson says. However, I would prefer we not promote this process to the newbies at WP:ROBO, because my sense is that "making better pages" is not the focus of most of the people I'm trying to attract...namely, people with expertise in one or more areas of robotics. We would really rather let them worry about whatever they're worried about and let us worry about higher assessment issues.

As a bonus, if we don't talk about the higher assessments at WP:ROBO, then we can let them assign their own assessments to their own and each other's articles. If we think they're making the wrong call, I'd prefer to discuss with someone how to tell a "stub" from a "start" from a "b-class", and ask them to look at it again...I think that process will be much more encouraging than the process of slapping a label on their article that they don't understand and feels vaguely like a failing grade.

Feedback would be very welcome.

Dan, Dank55 on WP, dank55@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dank55 (talkcontribs) 03:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Dan, I'm not sure -- especially because I really, really am a newbie around here and am not confident I know what I'm talking about.
In my typically perverse way, I probably agree with both of you: with what Jameson is saying now -- and with what you were saying to me earlier.
  • If I understand what Jameson is saying, then I agree that we ought to be ambitious and go for as many articles with high classifications as we can get. This is based on my (very limited!) experience with Nausea (novel) last week. Maybe I'm totally delusional, but here's how it looks to me: I showed up, at the end of the month, for the Novels project Collaboration of the Month, hoping to get some training working along with more experienced novels editors. (I hadn't read Nausea or thought about it in years.) Guess what? Nobody else shows up. I get kind of frustrated, so I go to my bookshelves and start looking up Sartre in the index of everything I have on novels -- and I search Amazon Reader similarly. Pretty soon, I've got a pile of citations. So I just start rough-sorting them into the text of the article, while periodically restructuring to keep the result halfway coherent. Outcome? After 5 days of sweat and hard work, the WP:DYK editors compliment me, put my hook on the Main Page, and tell me I ought to be looking into WP:GA. And, if you want my own honest opinion, I think the article looks like a mess that was thrown together with too much work over too short a period of time -- but I also think it will clean up well. I'm pretty positive I can get GA -- after a thorough cleaning. Then, after a Peer Review, I'm pretty positive I can get FA not too too long from now. (Please do bear in mind, though, that I myself have so far only gotten to DYK.)
  • Moral of story: If you start out with a reasonably rich pile of references and are willing to work very hard, then getting a decent article is fairly inevitable.
  • However, I also agree with you. The process I just described requires a tremendous amount of housework and wikitechnique. I agree that it's hard to imagine that a lot of domain experts in robotics are going to want to put themselves through it or will succeed very well if unaided. Therefore, we've got to be prepared to provide a lot of support.
What I (newbie that I am) would like to suggest is slightly different. I think that -- absolutely(!) without in any way discouraging people who really only want to write a stub or a start class -- we should encourage people to try for DYK then GA then FA -- and we should support them with copyediting and housekeeping. (Assuming that enough copyeditors will sign up and not too many copyeditees ask for help.) Rather than letting them self-assess and then drop their article off at start or B class for us to take it the rest of the way, we should make it their responsibility (and their pride in their work) to take the article from beginning to end -- but we should actively help them do it (within reason).
I actually wrote up a proposal along these lines earlier today -- and it's in my sandbox. I wasn't really sure it's what I wanted to propose -- and, even if so, I wasn't sure I like my present, verbose, pompous, overly detailed wording -- so I wasn't ready to release it. But, since you ask . . . William P. Coleman (talk) 05:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
(reply to William, copied to JamesonTai) It's true, if you put some work in, it's possible to get the higher ratings...and if you want to help people in WP:ROBO do that, that's fantastic. I want to say again, in case it wasn't clear...I have only one "passion", and that is that we don't lose newbies that I bring in...for all other issues, goals and people, I don't feel passionate, we can do whatever you guys like, and I'll help. I think Jameson is wondering if I'm going to screw things up by trying to keep things so simple and transparent for my newbies...but an easy fix would just be not to direct my newbies to the front page, to give them a link of their own in the project. I don't think the link should say "newbies", because of course they'll be oldbies before long, I think it just depends what they want to work on...I'll ask around! - Dan Dank55 (talk) 02:18, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Dan, I know you're disappointed with my response. We (all of us) need to talk more until we work out some vision that's exciting, focused, and practical.
  • Please don't doubt for a single minute that I agree with and support 100% your basic, core instinct that
  • We need to attract people who are experienced with robots and passionate about them -- not just library researchers and catalogers.
  • We can't scare them away with the typically preposterous amounts of Wiki-obstruction.
  • However, I was trying to temper that with three thoughts:
  • It seems clear to me that the easy way to eventually get GA or FA is to start out with the references, get a bunch of quotes, organize them, and then fill in the blanks. If you start the other way -- trying to expand a stub or a start-class that's unreferenced -- it can be extremely difficult, not to mention painful.
  • You seem to want me to help people, but I'm being honest about my personal limitations. If you asked me to turn a stub about poetry, novels or visual arts into a GA, then I'd pull books off my own shelves, check a few more out of the library, and look in Amazon Reader. But, when it comes to robotics, I personally don't know jack and wouldn't know where to start. I can help a lot, and am willing, but I can't supply raw material or expertise.
  • You yourself have already made a big, big contribution by working with the MOS and FA about what, for robotics, would constitute a reliable source.
  • Many of the good or better articles on WP:ROBO now seem to be general overviews. Or am I missing them? Maybe what we (Jameson, you, me, others) need to do is start a group project ourselves to create/expand a few articles on specifics: for example, a specific robot, then a specific manufacturer, then a specific anime. We'd try to get them at least to GA. Then maybe that experience would help us arrive at consensus about how to usefully publish guidance and models for the newer people we'd like to attract.
Generally, I'm saying, "?????"
--Bill
William P. Coleman (talk) 17:33, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Bill, do you mind if I copy this to WP:ROBO/ADMINLOG and answer there? It's great stuff...and there are reasons to want that page to be long, anyway. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 19:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Dan, go ahead an copy as much as you think is good. I very much think this should be a general discussion. -- Bill ... William P. Coleman (talk) 20:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey[edit]

On the LGBT Wikiproject talk page, I forgot to mention that I am also wanting to create some human rights articles and need sources for them as well: Human rights in Canada, Human Rights in Chile, Human rights in Italy, Human rights in Poland, Human rights in South Africa. However, The link you gave me I think helps me on that as well. Can you think of any more sources? --Grrrlriot (talk) 04:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I've included pretty well every worthwhile LGBT link I know in the bottom half of the sidebar on my blog. There's a fair amount of worldwide news coverage, including human rights, at the Pinknews link there, some at 365Gay, and less at NY Blade (which is mostly US) -- all listed under "_ Gay news and journalism."
To some extent, the links under "_ Gay teen suicide" and "_ Youth in crisis" represent human rights issues and, in that form, very definitely include the US and Canada. (I'm especially interested in those problems and feel that the US, and other countries, are practicing virtual genocide against LGBT youth. I plan eventually to ensure that Wikipedia covers it adequately.) The Covenant House link under "_ Youth in crisis" makes some attempt to cover all of North and Central America. William P. Coleman (talk) 05:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the information, William. I appreciate it! :) Also, I hought you might be interested in this: Wikipedia:WikiProject Gender Studies/Feminism Task Force --Grrrlriot (talk) 23:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Bill, if I can butt in on this one (I do have more interests than robotics :), you'll get no argument from me that the gay-baiting tactics of the right, and general lack of resources in the U.S. (but not so much in Canada) for gay teens, contribute to gay teen suicide. On the other hand, this touches on something I was just talking about today with Orangemike and my partner John (and indulge me a short digression, I'll get there). The ACLU (or rather, successful local chapters of the ACLU) is the first example I can find of an organization with the full complement of "wiki-values", predating Wikipedia by decades, as far as I can tell (and my partner is considering writing an article on this topic, he's on the national board), and they did it because they faced exactly the same pressures as Wikipedia did: a steady onslaught of people yelling at them for not representing their values. This is why the ACLU found that they had to adopt "NPOV" in every statement they made, it was the only way to "stay sane", which is exactly what you hear WP admins saying. So I think both WP and the ACLU (and now I'm back to your point) would reject the language "virtual genocide" in an article or (in the case of the ACLU) a press release or a court brief; not because it's not true, but because if they allow strong language once, they get yelled at by all the other people who want to use strong language for their equally valid causes. This is, of course, no reason whatsoever not to use this language when talking with each other. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 00:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Dan, I do appreciate your attempt to be soothing.
But, gee, the whole thing is really dispiriting. . . . Around WP, even my friends misinterpret and misread me.
Could you please point out anything in my LGBT talk post where I said, implied, or hinted that such language or tone should be used in the main space?
  • I was -- as always -- careful, despite my intemperance there, in my writing. I separated my suggestions about what I thought we should actually do (as opposed to just rhetorically using "this language when talking with each other") by setting my recommendations off in a series of 5 bullets. In none of those did I suggest we become non-NPOV. In 2 of them, I reiterated strong remarks about "maintaining our objectivity and factualness" and not "abandoning our mission, our integrity, or our policies."
  • In the other discussion you and I are having, it's I who am the one wanting to stay wiki-proper and ingratiating to the powers that be by building our articles with references from the ground up. Why would you imagine I'd suddenly change?
  • You've apparently read my user page thoughtfully and you are familiar with my background. For example, do you know why (besides massive wiki-discouragement, including about the deletion flak you've been getting, Dan) I've been quiet here for the last week or so? It's because I've been intensively working with a group of people to prepare a business client's submission to the FDA. Do you have any idea the level of science, NPOV, and care in tone and language that requires? This is my day job. I've been successful at it for 30 years.
  • If you're interested in commenting on the topic I was actually writing about, could you please read the Teenage suicide article that was being discussed. Do you, any more than Pairadox or I, regard it as useful to the troubled teens who might come to read it -- or to concerned friends or relatives? Now, please try a hypothetical thought experiment. Suppose someone assigned you and I to start with the references in the sidebar of my blog and rebuild that article so that it could get WP:GA -- and also simultaneously, merely by the use of notable facts and a writing style with some trace of warmth or awareness, give people the encouragement, information, and wherewithal to contact the available crisis hotlines or professional help. Could we do it -- respecting both of the goals just stated? Think of it as a sheer challenge to our intelligence and writing ability.
  • Now try a second thought experiment. Suppose, instead, that we were assigned to write such a WP:GA on homeless LGBT teens. The sidebar in my blog gives several references -- including a well-researched and -documented report from the NGLTF -- and including a series of 3 reports (from 2003, 2005, and 2007) paid for by the New York City Council and prepared by the nonpartisan, non-gay Empire State Coalition of Social Workers -- so such an article would have no possible problems with notability or research. In this hypothetical article, would we need to get rhetorical -- or could we just state the facts neutrally and let them speak for themselves? (Among the documented, neutral facts that would emerge are these: 3,800 people under 25 live on streets of NY City, and 30% are LGBT. This is 3 times the % of NY’s LGBT community. Social service agencies have 78 beds for them. 42% sleep on streets, in subways or empty buildings. Many turn to prostitution to spend the night.)
  • Now try a third experiment -- a WP:GA on children who are abused at home or bullied at school for being (or being perceived as) LGBT.
  • So, . . . er, . . . like, . . . uh, . . . what exactly is it about the suggestions I made in that post (although I do admit that my rhetoric and anger were way over the top) that could be construed as wild-eyed, flaming, impractical, or contrary to the nature, guidelines, or policies of WP?
All this of course, is just my not-very-humble opinion. I mean, you know how reasonable I am. William P. Coleman (talk) 15:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
To respond to the least important thing first, robot deletionism, I am very encouraged that I have gotten 2 emails from admins saying "we need you, keep it up", and I made a comment about that on my talk page. I am also supported by an enormous ego, big enough to believe that 1. I have some understanding of both sides of a certain cultural divide, and 2. I will eventually feel a sense of success in making a certain amount of peace between the two camps, although this is quite a difficult problem. But back to you.
>Around WP, even my friends misinterpret and misread me.
That's not my read of what I said...but then, if I'm misreading you, it wouldn't be, would it? The first thing I wrote in response was "Ack! That was a random thought that plopped out of my head, but I really appreciate the time you took to help me to get to understand your realities." But this is being flip, and also inaccurate. What's going on here is that simply the word "genocide" suggests that you feel the same way that I do, that many people are allowing themselves to treat the needs of gay teens in a cold and inhuman way which is contributing to teen suicide. What I told you is something that I have come to understand which makes me feel better about what sometimes seems to be a very stupid and unfeeling world. I read Teenage suicide, and I agree with your point completely. In fact, I think you're right on all the issues you mention, and if somehow I could get more of the GLBT community in NC to communicate with you and people like you on Wikipedia, I think it would help make them more effective. I've got an awards thing with the NC ACLU tonight (Lewis Black is speaking!), I'll talk with people there about the issues you're raising. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 19:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
P.S. John goes to NYC 4 times a year for the national board meetings, and occasionally I come along...please let me know if you're going to be in NYC in April or July, I'd like to catch a meal. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 19:14, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
P.P.S. The "wikiproper" thing is a good point, and I'll clarify over at ADMINLOG...you know the place. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 19:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
P.P.P.S. Actually the "clarification" is on my user (not talk) page...comments are welcome. I've been changing some of my comments over at WP:ROBO to be more "wikiproper", my guess is that my edits are entirely in line with what you and Jameson, and I, want now, but tell me if I'm wrong. Btw, I think you and I have a lot in common in our approach to activism, as you'll see. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 15:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXI - February 2008[edit]

The February 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot --12:22, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Dank55/essays[edit]

Hi Bill, I'm writing an essay for WP:WPMoS, and you're welcome to give input if you like. I hope I can ask your advice now and then for projects like this. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 19:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Dan, please do. If I can help with this or -- as I mentioned before -- if you or any robotics people would like me to help with articles about specific robots or other specific topics, I'd be happy to. Please note, however, that I'm continuing to be in and out of town until at least the end of next week and snowed under with day job projects. Other than you and robotics, however, the work I've been doing lately reminds me how much I have to contribute in the real world. My feelings about Wikipedia and Wikipedians are extremely dim. My general plans are to revise my Nausea article and then to seek out other obviously notable articles that I'm interested but that I'm sure no other Wikipedian is likely to give a damn about. There are millions of such articles on arts topics. I'll work on them by myself, in my own time, and try to get them through the DYK --> GA --> FA process. Best wishes, Bill. William P. Coleman (talk) 20:09, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
>reminds me how much I have to contribute in the real world.
That put a smile on my face, it sounds like things are going well for you, good luck! There is much to cheer and much to curse on Wikipedia...it's just a collection of people, some of whom are wonderful, such as yourself. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 20:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter[edit]

Delivered by SatyrBot around 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC) SatyrBot (talk) 18:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Novels Collaboration of the Month[edit]

You supported The Betrothed, which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXII - March 2008[edit]

The March 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot --18:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels - 1st Coordinators Election[edit]

An election has been proposed and has been set up for this project. Description of the roles etc., can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators. If you wish to stand, enter your candidacy before the end of March and ask your questions of anyone already standing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators/May 2008. Voting will start on the 1st April and close at the end of April. The intention is for the appointments to last from May - November 2008. For other details check out the pages or ask. KevinalewisBot (talk) 14:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXIII - April 2008[edit]

The April 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 23:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXIV - May 2008[edit]

The May 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. SteveCrossinBot (talk) 08:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter[edit]

This newsletter was delivered by §hepBot around 16:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC). ShepBot (talk) 16:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXV - June 2008[edit]

The June 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. SteveBot (owner) 05:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Hello! :) I thought you might be interested in this. Check it out and add your name under "Participants" if your interested. Have a nice day and happy editing! --Grrrlriot (talk) 00:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Robotics July Newsletter[edit]

Wikiprojectrobotics.png

The WikiProject Robotics Newsletter
Issue I (July 2008)


Project news
  • Project now covers 1000 articles on Wikipedia and is continuously growing in coverage and in members
  • New article assessment drive! Please help by assessing articles with no class assessment or importance rating!
  • New {{Robotics Barnstar}}! Give it to someone who has improved significant portions of robotics articles or WikiProject Robotics!
  • Four new DYKs were featured this month.
Articles of note

New Featured articles:

New Good articles:

Current proposals and discussions
  • Discussion on whether to add subcategories into this WikiProject and whether to create separate task forces per subcategory.
Awards and honors
  • User:Jiuguang Wang was recently awarded the Wikipedia Barnstar for his continued efforts in the article assessment drive.
The current Robotics Collaborations of the Fortnight are:
Editor Nominated Topic Robotics COTWnew.png
B-Class Improvement Drive FIRST Robotics
Start/Stub Improvement Drive Home automation

Every fortnight three robotics-related topics, stubs, or red linked articles are chosen for you to improve. Be bold!
This COTF is organized by WikiProject Robotics. (Nominate future collaborations or see past collaborations.)
This WP:ROBO/COTF is effective: February 29, 2008—March 13, 2008.


Things to do
  1. Continue upkeep of Robotics Portal
  2. Assign a class and importance level to unassessed articles
  3. Place {{WikiProject Robotics}} on every related talk page.

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter (July 2008)[edit]

  • Newsletter delivery by xenobot 13:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Look Homeward, Angel[edit]

I've made this the wikinovels collaboration of the month. You voted for it, and I was hoping you could help me, especially with the plot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert Waalk (talkcontribs) 19:41, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Calling all active WP:NOVELS members[edit]

WikiProject Novels Roll Call
Book collection.jpg

WikiProject Novels is currently holding a roll call, which we hope to have annually. Your username is listed on the members list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active within the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:Novels editor, please add your name back to the Active Members list. Also feel free to join any of our task forces and take a look at the project's Job Centre to get involved!

Next month we will begin the coordinator election selection process. We hope to have more involvement and input this time around! More news will be forthcoming. Thanks, everyone! María (habla conmigo) 14:07, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels Newsletter - September 2008[edit]

This newsletter was automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 15:38, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Invitation[edit]

Womanpower logo.svg Hello William P. Coleman, thank you for your contributions on articles related to Feminism. I'd like to invite you to become a part of Feminism Task Force, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles dealing with gender studies related articles on Wikipedia.

If you would like to participate, please visit the Feminism Task Force page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Participants". Thanks!

--Grrrlriot ( ) 01:16, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Novels Collaboration of the Month[edit]

You supported Steppenwolf (novel), which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. Liveste (talkedits) 00:58, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject France newsletter[edit]

WikiProject France News

What's new?[edit]

  • Crystal 128 desktop.png The project has recently experienced a complete redesign. The Outreach department has also undergone a major expansion, and this newsletter is the result of that.
  • The review department is currently under development, with several new proposals underway. Internal peer review had begun on the page of the project's Review Department. The department currently provides a centralized platform off all currently open reviews throughout the project (Featured Articles, Peer Reviews, Good Articles, Articles for Deletion, Categories for Discussion, etc.)
  • A new task force has been introduced: the Paris task force. Any users interested in contributing to the taskforce can join on the project page.
  • There is a current discussion about merging the French Communes WikiProject into ours. This communes project will be organised as a task force.
User-related news

Notifications[edit]

Complete project tasks
Overview

This is the new project newsletter, covering months August through to October, which will contain information regarding new Good and Featured articles, recent project changes, general related news, and recent proposals.

If you've just joined, add your name to the Members section of Wikipedia:WikiProject France. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the creation. Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Articles
  • Five articles are currently undergoing external peer reviews:
  1. Louvre Abu Dhabi
  2. Louvre
  3. Family Moving Day
  4. Napoleon I
  5. List of Bellflower Bunny Episodes
  • Symbol support vote.svg Two articles have reached GA status this month:
Newsletter contributors

Thank you for your contributions to the project, Jordan Contribs 14:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter[edit]

This newsletter was sent by §hepBot (Disable) at 21:28, 12 November 2008 (UTC) by the request of Moni3 (talk)

Cardiology task force[edit]

Cardiology task force[edit]

-- Addbot (talk) 00:11, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

T.F.AlHammouri (talk) 12:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Poetry collaboration[edit]

Quill and ink.svg
WikiProject Poetry invites all members to participate in the current article improvement drive!

Our goal is to improve the quality of important poetry-related articles. There is no set deadline and participation is purely voluntary.

The current focus is: Samuel Taylor Coleridge.

Suggestions for future collaborative efforts are welcome at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poetry. Thank you for your support!


--Midnightdreary (talk) 14:56, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter (June 2009)[edit]

  • Newsletter delivery by xenobot 17:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Input request[edit]

Ancient Roman inquires[edit]

Your input would be appreciated at

Thanks.--Doug Coldwell talk 20:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Robotics[edit]

Hi. I see you are listed as a member of the WikiProject Robotics project. Some of us are trying to assess who and how many of those Wikipedia editors who have signed on to the project in the pass seven years are still active, or would like to still be active, in the endeavor of improving Robotics-related articles on the English Wikipedia.

If you have the time and inclination, would appreciate it if you would weigh in on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Robotics Talk page, or perhaps indicate current interest by your name on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Robotics/Participants page. If you are no longer interested in participating, please just remove your name from the Participants page. Cheers. N2e (talk) 05:37, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)[edit]


Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization consisting of over 28,000 volunteers in more than 100 countries. The collaboration was formed to organize medical scholarship in a systematic way in the interests of evidence-based research: the group conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.

Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account. Thank you Cochrane!

If you are stil active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 19:52, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)[edit]


The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration.

  • Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
  • Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
  • If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 20:12, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

The Pulse (WP:MED newsletter) June 2014[edit]

The first edition of The Pulse has been released. The Pulse will be a regular newsletter documenting the goings-on at WPMED, including ongoing collaborations, discussions, articles, and each edition will have a special focus. That newsletter is here.

The newsletter has been sent to the talk pages of WP:MED members bearing the {{User WPMed}} template. To opt-out, please leave a message here or simply remove your name from the mailing list. Because this is the first issue, we are still finding out feet. Things like the layout and content may change in subsequent editions. Please let us know what you think, and if you have any ideas for the future, by leaving a message here.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:24, 5 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine.

BMJ offering 25 free accounts to Wikipedia medical editors[edit]

Neat news: BMJ is offering 25 free, full-access accounts to their prestigious medical journal through The Wikipedia Library and Wiki Project Med Foundation (like we did with Cochrane). Please sign up this week: Wikipedia:BMJ --Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Medical Translation Newsletter[edit]


Medical translation.svg

Wikiproject Medicine; Translation Taskforce

Stetho book.jpg

Medical Translation Newsletter
Issue 1, June/July 2014
by CFCF, Doc James

sign up for monthly delivery


Wiki Project Med Foundation logo.svg
TWB.svg

This is the first of a series of newsletters for Wikiproject Medicine's Translation Task Force. Our goal is to make all the medical knowledge on Wikipedia available to the world, in the language of your choice.

note: you will not receive future editions of this newsletter unless you *sign up*; you received this version because you identify as a member of WikiProject Medicine

Spotlight - Simplified article translation


Wikiproject Medicine started translating simplified articles in February 2014. We now have 45 simplified articles ready for translation, of which the first on African trypanosomiasis or sleeping sickness has been translated into 46 out of ~100 languages. This list does not include the 33 additional articles that are available in both full and simple versions.

Our goal is to eventually translate 1,000 simplified articles. This includes:

We are looking for subject area leads to both create articles and recruit further editors. We need people with basic medical knowledge who are willing to help out. This includes to write, translate and especially integrate medical articles.

What's happening?


IEG grant
CFCF - "IEG beneficiary" and editor of this newsletter.

I've (CFCF) taken on the role of community organizer for this project, and will be working with this until December. The goals and timeline can be found here, and are focused on getting the project on a firm footing and to enable me to work near full-time over the summer, and part-time during the rest of the year. This means I will be available for questions and ideas, and you can best reach me by mail or on my talk page.

Wikimania 2014

For those going to London in a month's time (or those already nearby) there will be at least one event for all medical editors, on Thursday August 7th. See the event page, which also summarizes medicine-related presentations in the main conference. Please pass the word on to your local medical editors.

Integration progress

There has previously been some resistance against translation into certain languages with strong Wikipedia presence, such as Dutch, Polish, and Swedish.
What was found is that thre is hardly any negative opinion about the the project itself; and any such critique has focused on the ways that articles have being integrated. For an article to be usefully translated into a target-Wiki it needs to be properly Wiki-linked, carry proper citations and use the formatting of the chosen target language as well as being properly proof-read. Certain large Wikis such as the Polish and Dutch Wikis have strong traditions of medical content, with their own editorial system, own templates and different ideas about what constitutes a good medical article. For example, there are not MEDRS (Polish,German,Romanian,Persian) guidelines present on other Wikis, and some Wikis have a stronger background of country-specific content.

  • Swedish
    Translation into Swedish has been difficult in part because of the amount of free, high quality sources out there already: patient info, for professionals. The same can be said for English, but has really given us all the more reason to try and create an unbiased and free encyclopedia of medical content. We want Wikipedia to act as an alternative to commercial sources, and preferably a really good one at that.
    Through extensive collaborative work and by respecting links and Sweden specific content the last unintegrated Swedish translation went live in May.
  • Dutch
    Dutch translation carries with it special difficulties, in part due to the premises in which the Dutch Wikipedia is built upon. There is great respect for what previous editors have created, and deleting or replacing old content can be frowned upon. In spite of this there are success stories: Anafylaxie.
  • Polish
    Translation and integration into Polish also comes with its own unique set of challenges. The Polish Wikipedia has long been independent and works very hard to create high quality contentfor Polish audience. Previous translation trouble has lead to use of unique templates with unique formatting, not least among citations. Add to this that the Polish Wikipedia does not allow template redirects and a large body of work is required for each article.
    (This is somewhat alleviated by a commissioned Template bot - to be released). - List of articles for integration
  • Arabic
    The Arabic Wikipedia community has been informed of the efforts to integrate content through both the general talk-page as well as through one of the major Arabic Wikipedia facebook-groups: مجتمع ويكيبيديا العربي, something that has been heralded with great enthusiasm.
Integration guides

Integration is the next step after any translation. Despite this it is by no means trivial, and it comes with its own hardships and challenges. Previously each new integrator has needed to dive into the fray with little help from previous integrations. Therefore we are creating guides for specific Wikis that make integration simple and straightforward, with guides for specific languages, and for integrating on small Wikis.

Instructions on how to integrate an article may be found here [5]

News in short


To come
  • Medical editor census - Medical editors on different Wikis have been without proper means of communication. A preliminary list of projects is available here.
  • Proofreading drives

Further reading



Thanks for reading! To receive a monthly talk page update about new issues of the Medical Translation Newsletter, please add your name to the subscriber's list. To suggest items for the next issue, please contact the editor, CFCF (talk · contribs) at Wikipedia:Wikiproject Medicine/Translation Taskforce/Newsletter/Suggestions.
Want to help out manage the newsletter? Get in touch with me CFCF (talk · contribs)
For the newsletter from Wikiproject Medicine, see The Pulse

If you are receiving this newsletter without having signed up, it is because you have signed up as a member of the Translation Taskforce, or Wiki Project Med on meta. 22:32, 16 July 2014 (UTC)