Jump to content

User talk:Roger Davies: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
EyeSerene (talk | contribs)
EyeSerene (talk | contribs)
Line 177: Line 177:


:Thanks Roger, that does help. I fully appreciate the need to separate the roles of coordinator and admin, but since in entrusting the tools the community has the expectation that admins are capable of exercising judgement about when to employ then, I did wonder if the notice was being over-cautious, or if there was some unwritten tradition in MilHist that coordinators are not expected to put on their admin hats while in the role. Just to reassure you that I've no intention of blocking half the membership, but via ANI I seem to have become involved in helping to police the [[WP:ARBMAC]] decision, and as you can imagine this impinges on many areas round the project, including MilHist. It might be best if I stay away as much as possible from Balkans-related areas of MilHist in the light of that, although it may be difficult given the scope. I've got a while to think about it though, so no big deal yet, and if you've got any thoughts I'd be pleased to hear them ;) [[User:EyeSerene|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#4B0082">EyeSerene</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:EyeSerene|<span style="color:#6B8E23">talk</span>]]</sup> 12:37, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks Roger, that does help. I fully appreciate the need to separate the roles of coordinator and admin, but since in entrusting the tools the community has the expectation that admins are capable of exercising judgement about when to employ then, I did wonder if the notice was being over-cautious, or if there was some unwritten tradition in MilHist that coordinators are not expected to put on their admin hats while in the role. Just to reassure you that I've no intention of blocking half the membership, but via ANI I seem to have become involved in helping to police the [[WP:ARBMAC]] decision, and as you can imagine this impinges on many areas round the project, including MilHist. It might be best if I stay away as much as possible from Balkans-related areas of MilHist in the light of that, although it may be difficult given the scope. I've got a while to think about it though, so no big deal yet, and if you've got any thoughts I'd be pleased to hear them ;) [[User:EyeSerene|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#4B0082">EyeSerene</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:EyeSerene|<span style="color:#6B8E23">talk</span>]]</sup> 12:37, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

::That sounds like the best way to go... and I agree that polarisation is undesirable if it goes too far; it's only a short step from there to groups set up to ensure articles have the 'right' political or nationalist spin. I suppose it relates to my earlier question too - under some of the arbcom decisions I've seen, the proverbial 'uninvolved admin' has incredibly wide-ranging discretionary powers, which in my view makes it all the more important that these are exercised thoughtfully and with due care, transparency, and process. I'm not really sure where I'm going with this, other than that I've started pontificating, which is usually a good sign I should go and find something productive to do... One thing I did mean to mention earlier but forgot - I noticed your comment to Cam re adminship, and ''if'' you're intending to nominate him at some point in the future, I'd be very grateful if you could let me know; I'd be delighted to provide a co-nom. [[User:EyeSerene|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#4B0082">EyeSerene</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:EyeSerene|<span style="color:#6B8E23">talk</span>]]</sup> 20:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:14, 7 November 2008

ARCHIVES: 123456789101112



If you post a message here, I'll usually respond here
(on this page) unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.


Barnstar

Wow, you're really giving the 11th ABN a really thorough copy-edit Roger. I can't thank you enough, but hopefully this'll help:

The Working Man's Barnstar
To Roger, for all his tireless contributuons and help on 11th Airborne Division (United States) Skinny87 (talk) 10:56, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear. I completely rewrote that section as well, after someone complained about it in the last FAC. What seems to be the main problem with it? Skinny87 (talk) 11:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I've have a look at it tonight when I get home from uni. What kind of link do you mean? Skinny87 (talk) 11:56, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have a look, but I'm not sure? Did I write that in the article? Skinny87 (talk) 12:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. Well, as I know that was the case (especially for the Americans) so I'll try and find quote and add it in somewhere at the beginning of the section. Skinny87 (talk) 12:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well yes there would be info on that, a fair bit of it I think. Should I try and rewrite the Knollwood section again with that info and the info on Allied airborne development? Skinny87 (talk) 13:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While we're on the subject of barnstars, it might be appropriate to award the very first one of those shiny new ACW task force barnstars (when complete) to the user who spent so much time helping to render its final design, Grayghost01. BusterD (talk) 16:20, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I endorse this as well.--Gen. Bedford his Forest 16:50, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Roger, thanks so much for the help. I did what we discussed and expanded the 'Formation' section, and all that needs doing is the extra references I added. If you could look it over when you have time and tell me if you think it's ready? Cheers, Skinny87 (talk) 11:56, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am so sorry

I have to leave for a while. I do not know when I will be back. I am so sarry to ahve to do this Roger, but the losses...I just can not take the losses anymore. I need a long rest, so I must leave for now. Since I volenteered to help as a coordinator I serve notice that you may reassign my spot to some one else if you need to. My guilt over this is emense, I have let you and the milhist project down, but if you could find it in your heart to forgive me for leaving the coordinators when you need us the most I would be in your debt. I shall return, but I do not know when. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:59, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done.

Done, closed and archived. Incidentally, "The Bugle" came out on top, so you get one of these.

What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
For coming up with the new name for the Military History Project Monthly Newsletter, which shall hereby be known as The Bugle, I am pleased to award you this barnstar. Cam (Chat) 07:08, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jon already handed out the writers barnstar, and I've given theed the wikichevrons. Now I'm hitting the sack. G'night. Cam (Chat) 07:08, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Novels Newsletter - November 2008

Archives  |  Tip Line  |  Editors

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter
Issue 28 - November 2008
Member news
  • Coordinators election voting and question time is now open. Project members should vote for any candidates they wish to support by November 28 at the Coordinator Elections. Yllosubmarine, aka Maria, has decided not to be reappointed, her work as sole Coordinator since the last elections in May is highly appreciated by all members of the project.
  • The Novels Project now has 88 active members.
  • 18 positions remain unfilled at the Job Centre. Members who are active project contributors are encouraged to apply even if they can only do a position for a short time.
  • Ladywitchthought has taken on the position of coordinator for the "Lemony Snicket task force".
Project news

- Contributors are the_ed17, Maclean25 & Captain-tucker (who searched the archives).

Task force and related news
– Position of editor for 'Task force news' is still available at the Job Centre.
Peer review and assessment news
the_ed17 (talk), Editor – Peer review and assessment news
Member in Focus
  • Hi, I have been around this project for quite some time now. Bit of a hiatus earlier this year, but back now just contributing. The Novels WikiProject wasn't started by me but my interest in the subject initially attracted me to what was here. It has developed substantially in the last few years and now takes in all forms of Narrative Prose Fiction within its scope. We are about the content not the format of the prose so WP:Books differs a little in that an implied format is entailed; also they can also focus more clearly on non-fiction. WP:Literature are the "new boys on the block" and are a little more focused on the "quality" aspects of literature, and again they have less emphasis on pure fiction and the prose aspect. Our biggest problem is to maintain a certain focus of interest across such a broad subject area and we need workers who can develop task forces, teams for assessment, teams for peer review and so much more. "So much to do, so little time, I'm late, I'm late, I'm late" to misquote from Alice in Wonderland.

Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk)

Current debates
  • The featured list Narnian timeline has been nominated for removal. You can comment here. The Narnian timeline is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community.
Novel related news
From the Outreach Department

As I shall be leaving Wikipedia, this will be my last newsletter. Any member who is interested in taking over the role of editor can sign up for the position at the Job Centre.

Over the last month I have been working on a portal for our project. So am happy to announce that the Novels Portal is now up and running.

Boylo (talk), Editor

Boylo:
Thank you for getting this newsletter back on its feet and going again. No Boylo equals no Novels Portal...heck, without you, we wouldn't have had a newsletter for these past months...so, for all of the members of the Novels WikiProject, I want to thank you for the time and effort you have put into this project, and I wish you the best of luck in all of your future endeavors. Thanks, pal.
the_ed17 (talk)
Collaboration of the Month
  • This month's Collaboration has been selected by popular vote and is : Novel.
    As this is our Project's premier article, all members are asked to assist.
    The next collaboration is due for selection on 21 November, 2008 so cast your vote.
Newsletter challenge

Our last newsletter's challenge The Cater Street Hangman was uncompleted.

  • The first person to start the article is mentioned in the next newsletter. This month's article is Mindplayers by science fiction author Pat Cadigan.
Announcements and open tasks
Open tasks logo WikiProject Novels • (inc. novellas, novelettes & short stories)
Announcements and open tasks

Please help with tagging articles!

This newsletter was automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 05:28, 3 November 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Re your question

The new year should be OK - I think the FA-Team project only runs until Christmas anyway, Sweeney Todd will have had its FAC by then, and the on/off GA working group reform proposals I seem to have ended up facilitating and just yesterday starting resurrecting will be done with... one way or another :P If you think I can be useful, I'd be happy to help out then. Lol, food processors are important too! EyeSerenetalk 13:21, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: Perhaps I should add that, if Tom's back by then and ready to step back into his coordinator shoes, I have no problem with the position being filled ;) EyeSerenetalk 13:36, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment

Thanks for your compliment about Protection of Military Remains Act 1986 on 13 Sept on my talk page. I've been off line for a while becuase my husband has been ill, so I've only just seen it. The Falklands bit took a bit of tracking down! Viv Hamilton (talk) 22:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

11th ABN

Hey Roger. I guess you're sick to death of this, but I'm thinking of finally taking it to FAC in a day or so. Do you think it's finally ready? Skinny87 (talk) 14:44, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Roger, and thanks for all the help you've given me. I'll take it over from here, ask EyeSerene to give it a look over. Skinny87 (talk) 09:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was reading this and noticed that a WW1 article I know of (Shrine of Remembrance) is not in Category:FA-Class World War I articles. Should it be? I was going to ask Tom, but given what has happened I thought it best to ask elsewhere and leave him in peace for the time being. Carcharoth (talk) 05:52, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Sandy fixed this. I could have done that myself, as she said. :-/ Carcharoth (talk) 06:36, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good ole Sandy :) I was just looking at it. --ROGER DAVIES talk 06:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Carcharoth has popped my watchlist about two dozen times tonight just when I'm trying to figure out why that blooming ad banner came back and I can't get rid of it ... grrrrr ... not happy with that banner ... the gadgets button is gone and the monobook.css code isn't working, and I've got Carcharoth setting off my watchlist while that blipping red banner is asking me to give more blood to Wiki :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sandy! Yeah, that bloody red banner is coming and going here too :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 06:55, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for clarification

I noticed in your 'What's expected' guide that you gave the caveat that coordinators who also happen to be admins do not become involved in admin duties. Obviously the usual rules about abusing the tools would apply, but are coordinator/admins no longer seen as sufficiently neutral or uninvolved to make appropriate judgments on any MilHist-related article? I'm not sure I'm entirely comfortable with it, if that's the case (and I'm already involved as an admin in some fairly contentious MilHist-related areas). Apologies if I've misunderstood... EyeSerenetalk 09:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Roger, that does help. I fully appreciate the need to separate the roles of coordinator and admin, but since in entrusting the tools the community has the expectation that admins are capable of exercising judgement about when to employ then, I did wonder if the notice was being over-cautious, or if there was some unwritten tradition in MilHist that coordinators are not expected to put on their admin hats while in the role. Just to reassure you that I've no intention of blocking half the membership, but via ANI I seem to have become involved in helping to police the WP:ARBMAC decision, and as you can imagine this impinges on many areas round the project, including MilHist. It might be best if I stay away as much as possible from Balkans-related areas of MilHist in the light of that, although it may be difficult given the scope. I've got a while to think about it though, so no big deal yet, and if you've got any thoughts I'd be pleased to hear them ;) EyeSerenetalk 12:37, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds like the best way to go... and I agree that polarisation is undesirable if it goes too far; it's only a short step from there to groups set up to ensure articles have the 'right' political or nationalist spin. I suppose it relates to my earlier question too - under some of the arbcom decisions I've seen, the proverbial 'uninvolved admin' has incredibly wide-ranging discretionary powers, which in my view makes it all the more important that these are exercised thoughtfully and with due care, transparency, and process. I'm not really sure where I'm going with this, other than that I've started pontificating, which is usually a good sign I should go and find something productive to do... One thing I did mean to mention earlier but forgot - I noticed your comment to Cam re adminship, and if you're intending to nominate him at some point in the future, I'd be very grateful if you could let me know; I'd be delighted to provide a co-nom. EyeSerenetalk 20:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]