User talk:HereToHelp/Archive 2

Main Page Revision

The page I proposed was User:Drumguy8800/Main page draft.. it is not the current main page, which I believe you are commenting on. drumguy⁸⁸⁰⁰ - speak? 02:03, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Main Page Redesign Effort

Relax, man. This project has come a long way. Have you noticed that nobody has voted for the current main page yet, and our previously biggest detractor (Quinlan) is now supporting the project?

That's an accomplishment we can all be proud of.

Do you see where this is headed? With so many cool designs, and interest in variety rising, it brings us one step closer to having multiple front pages. I think the mechanics are already present for configuring customized links in the sidebar, and even if they are not, many users have a toolbar upon which they can put their alternate Main Page. What we're going to wind up with is multiple fully operational alternate Main Pages. No one is saying we can't make use of them. It's not like we are going to delete them. Heck, I've had a customized main page as my user page several times.

But we can centralize them, and provide everyone with the links so that they can choose whichever one they want.

There are no losers here. So let's work together rather than at cross purposes, and let the election run its natural course. There are too few votes to be able to predict which way this thing will go anyways.

In the mean time, I suggest we do the following:

1. Archive the petty bickering discussions from the discussion part of the voting page. They detract from the election. (remember, round 6 archive).
2. Track down and fix that formatting glitch.
3. Run a clean election.

Once we have the new main page in place, we can begin discussing how exactly to implement the multiple main page system.

--Go for it! 16:26, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Quoting a visitor to the Main Page Redesign:

"Wow. You people are messed up."

We need to archive the bickering. Will you do that please? It is reflecting badly upon our reputations and upon the project. And possibly upon Wikipedia as well.

--Go for it! 17:34, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

SW image

Can you possibly find a full-frame image of the twin sunset scene that you just added to the ANH article? The Wookieepedian 23:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Done.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 23:53, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Cool. :) The Wookieepedian 01:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Com portal talk

hi, it is not a good idea to remove any comments from a talk page no matter how unrelated/random they are (unless it is a complete vandalism/libel or you are archiving). just wanted to let you know. Renata 04:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee elections

Hi, this is just to let you know that User:Jayjg is standing for the arbitration committee, and that the elections end on Sunday, January 22 at 7 pm Eastern Standard Time. In case you haven't voted and have any interest, his nomination page is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_January_2006/Vote/Jayjg My vote was discounted because apparently I don't have enough edits, but I noticed there seems to be a campaign against him, and some of the votes against him look pretty crazy, so he needs some more support. Pintele Yid 08:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Subjects on the browsebar

You keep citing "the Top 10" as some kind of policy or gospel or something. The "Top 8" became the "Top 10" when 2 random blokes came along and added Art and Philosophy. I was the guy who added Philosophy. Actually, I've made most of the improvements to the browsebar over the past two or three months, and put it on most of the pages it's on today. I added Almanac, Glossaries, Lists, Overviews, combined Wikipedia FAQs and Ask a Question into Questions, and changed A-Z to Index'. I'm also the one who created and filled the Top 10 category, and the one who blanked the Top 8 (I was planning on keeping my category-related efforts separate on a different user account because it looked like it would clog my contribution history, but logging off and on got to be a bit tedious, so I don't use that account anymore.) Therefore, the only real precedent here is that the browsebar keeps improving and getting refined over time.

But we're coming up on a natural limit: size. But the addition of Health only took up about one character's worth of extra space, because Mathematics became Math, and pipes take almost no room at all. "Mathematics" is 11 characters long, while "Health | Math" is 13 characters, but since the pipe sits between two spaces, no kerning space is assigned to it, so it's almost nothing and so it's more like 12 characters long. One character difference in increase.

An analysis of the subjects on the browsebar will show that it's not a true hierarchy. It's more of a cross between the section titles of a newspaper ("Culture", "Health", "People", "Society", "Technology") and the departments of a University ("Art", "History", "Mathematics", "Philosophy", "Science"), with Geography (a branch and sub-department of science and a major section of most almanacs and encyclopedias) thrown in at the top for good measure. This system gives pretty good coverage, without being too sophisticated (which would take up far too much space anyways -- "Social Sciences" for instance, is not a good choice for the browsebar because of its length.

So Health fits into the system quite well (and having only 6 letters is a better choice than Medicine which has 8 and which is a subtopic of Health anyways). Health is a very central issue, which is why it is given its own section in newspapers: it is one of the daily concerns of people, and has become a central component of lifestyles these days, which are often chosen or critiqued by how healthy or unhealthy they are for you.

So, I didn't choose "Health" lightly. A lot of thought went into it. And because of the central importance of health (and health information), if we can improve access to that by putting the word Health front and center, then that's a good thing.

The health of the world is in your hands.

What do you say?

--Go for it! 05:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Alright them. About adding help, yes it's on the left of the screen but many users overlook that. Redundancy can be good. It means anons find it one way when another would not have reached them. Besides, it doesn't take up any more space; the bottom line is longer. I'm not going to put it back (to avoid edit warring) but I want you to think about that.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, it got me brainstorming. Okay, here's another possibility... Since we have Introduction already on the bar, and that is the most likely link that newcomers will click, we should make sure that the intro explains very clearly how to access help. Another thing we can work on in the future is getting "Help" moved to just under "Main Page" in the menu on the left bar, so it is more easily noticeable. It should also probably go on the line at the top of the page, right along with the user's name, my talk, my preferences, my watchlist, my contributions, and log out. Let me know what you think. --Go for it! 23:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that last one, but your first two points look fine to me.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 00:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Concerning the election

Since the election has become a defacto event that a lot of people have participated in, we need to treat it like any other election. Otherwise, we'll just be "those guys who messed with the results of the election". Once the election is over, we should just prepare the winner for placement on the main page, place it there, and move on to the next step. Otherwise, those who voted for the winning candidate may get angry (I know I would if I was someone outside the project who came in specifically to vote). Keep in mind that I will wholeheartedly support any page that wins. After the election is over, there will be plenty of opportunity to further refine the new main page in its new home, and for whomsoever wants to run another election to replace that page. My job will be done once the Main Page has been upgraded, and I plan to move on to other areas of Wikipedia after that is accomplished. I have enjoyed working with you on the Help Page and the Main Page Redesign, and I intend to invite you to join in on whatever project on Wikipedia I delve into next. Sincerely, --Go for it! 23:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, we should abandon this confusing draft sytem and upload the winner to the main project page. People have placed valuable comments on that comprehensive breakdown of the individual parts lower down on the page. Let's start from the elected draft as a base and edit in the rest of the feedback in a free editing session. After that we can have one, maybe two more chances for feedback before we make a final draft and send it up against the current Main Page in a well publicized vote.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 00:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Main Page Drafts

I've added links on each draft at for example Draft 6A to all of the other drafts, it's really the only way to make comparisons. If you think this is stupid then let me know, otherwise I'll keep it up. hydnjo talk 03:42, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Your idea on two lines for the browsebar subjects

One line just isn't big enough to hold all the top subject categories. If we can make it look good, then I'm all for expanding the browsebar to another line as you tried earlier. Besides, with Cyberjunkie guarding it all the time, it'll take both of us to push such a change through. I tried using abbreviations, but some other guy wouldn't go for that and suggested I try some other approach.

How about this:

Art | Business | Culture | Geography | Health | History

Mathematics | People | Philosophy | Politics | Science | Society | Technology

Almanac · Categories · Glossaries · Lists · Overviews · Portals · Questions · Site news · Index

Note that business is a broader category than economics, and includes it. The economics department in most universities is part of each university's business school.

Let me know what you think. --Go for it! 08:46, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

The layout looks good. However you have to consider that some of the Portals are not very good. Science and Geography are better than Business. We sgould get other people to clean up the portals that need it. This isn't a list of topics but rather a showcase of the best of what Wikipedia has to offer.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 12:09, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Usability/Main Page/Draft

I'm posting this with three of the leadership in this effort: (alphabetically) David Levy, Go for it! and HereToHelp.

This page is getting to be non-navigable. The issue at hand is seems to have become one of deciding the procedure whereby a new MP is chosen and I believe that it deserves its own attention space. I therefore propose that you start a new page called Wikipedia:WikiProject Usability/Main page selection procedure or whatever you decide. Post it prominently on this headline page and on the new page describe the two alternatives (many vs two) and invite discussion of the merits of both on the new talk page. The talk page can for example be set-up as two sections: (1) I prefer.... and (2) I prefer.... Since this will be a discussion of the pros and cons of each approach, it will not be a binding vote but rather a gathering of the communities thoughts. You (the principals) having heard from the community in a focused way can decide on the consensus opinion and if you can't decide then go on to another usability project. hydnjo talk 23:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

It's a very rare occurance when the letter H is at the end of a list. :-)

Don't you feel special!

The election is going fine. We're getting so much feedback and it's going to a a heck of a job to sort through it as is. I will, however, post what sections are being added to and which have, for lack of a better word, died. We'll proccess all of this later when it stops pouring in and then creat a final draft during a two week period. This will then be submitted against the current Main Page.

My concern is the multi-draft faction vs the one collaborative draft faction not getting lost in the dust-up.

The point I'm trying to make is that we'll organize this later, when we step this up for our final vote. It's fine. Really.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 00:10, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

OK then, I'll butt out (for now)  :-) hydnjo talk 00:43, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Geesh

I'm posting this with the same three principals in the MP effort that I posted to earlier: (alphabetically) David Levy, Go for it! and HereToHelp.

Hey you guys and especially Gfi! I hope that I didn't precipitate any bad blood between y'all by addressing my proposal to the three of you, you three just seemed to be in the leadership. I obviously don't agree with all of you, but I thought it efficient in making my point to post directly to the three of you. I am deeply apologetic if by my posts I have created or widened any rift amongst you - that was certainly not my intent. I am going to assume that we are continuing to work together on this. hydnjo talk 01:40, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Just to let you know...

Go for it! suspects you and I of being sock puppets of one another, and is attempting to initiate a CheckUser investigation. I advised him to proceed with his plan (while expressing my disappointment that this is necessary). —David Levy 01:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

We agree with each other; that's it. Is that so amazing?--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 01:54, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, but don't forget that we also disagree with him. Surely, that must be indicative of a conspiracy!  ;) —David Levy 01:58, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I was just about to say so on your page. I think GFI! is trying to break up a bloc of opposition.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 01:59, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know about that, but I do feel that it's rather arrogant of him to perceive our behavior as remotely suspicious (as though the concept of two people disagreeing with him is inconceivable, so we must be the same person). —David Levy 02:08, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Case in point, I agree with that.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 02:10, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I'd rather help build the team. Didn't mean to freak you out with my query, I didn't realize someone was watching over my shoulder.  ;-) By the way, Thanks for the assist on moving the votes to sub-pages. --Go for it! 22:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

It's fine. You recently redid the intro on the talk page but left intact my bit about us going to a single draft for the final vote. Does this mean you've given up on/seen the good in that idea?--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 22:54, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh and by the way Gfi!, if you're lurking about, someone is always looking over your shoulder. Be sure of it.  ;-) hydnjo talk 03:11, 30 January 2006 (UTC))

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggghhhhhhhhtttttttt...--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 22:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Vandal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:168.99.197.187 Keeps coming back, time after time after being blocked. This time vandalized McCarthyism and Chief Osceola and Renegade, any suggestions?

Who do I look like to you, an Admin?

I say block him or her for good; anyone who wants to contribute from that machine can create an account. The pros outweight the cons.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Of course you look like an admin! :p I went ahead and blocked for a week and am going to keep an eye next week. --Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 22:05, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

"Of course you look like an admin! :p" I'm honored. I wouldn't mind being one...--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 22:07, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Your edits are more diverse than mine, I am mainly an image-admin. :-p. You might consider throwing yourself up for Adminship --Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 22:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe...it looks better if someone else nominates me. You don't have to if you don't want to, and at least give me time to write my speech and answers to the questions.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 22:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Shoot me an email when you are ready --Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 22:37, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Forget the email; watch this page and I'll tell you here. It will probably be closer to the weekend, maybe even after it. No rush.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 22:43, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I allready watch your talk page ;) how you think I caught the vandal notice :p --Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 22:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

So there's no reason to go into emails. Thanks for this...I do appreciate it.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 22:47, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Apologies, I did think you were an admin. AriGold 13:29, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

It wouldn't be too hard to fix that...--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:28, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Weird thing. I came here to offer you to be nominated if you are ready. But I must warn you that I have a bad eye for nominations: I nominated two people and they both failed. But as they said, third time is the charm! :) Anyways, one thing that might be held against you is time - you have been here "just" 6 months. So let me know if you want me to put you up. Renata 23:46, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

A lot can happen during that time. I think I'll procrastine a little while longer; whether that's a week or another 6 months I'm not yet sure.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 00:09, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

ushpizzin

you created a page by the name of ushpizzin. There is also a page by the name of ushpizin. There should not not be two. Jon513 20:45, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

A simple redirect should suffice. A merge at most. the reason it was created is because I couldn't find the link to the existant article.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:28, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Steve_Jobs2_cropped.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Steve_Jobs2_cropped.png. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. -- Carnildo 22:16, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

There was an uncropped version that was deleted. I got it from the Arabic Wikipedia and cropped it. I assumed it was okay; apparently not. Go ahead and delete it; but you'll have to do some interlanguage hunting because it's on more than just the Arabic version.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 22:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

We're supposed to be implementing the results of Round 6

Are you implementing the results of the consensus reached in Round 6, or are you pushing a personal agenda? I ask this because I noticed something: only 50 votes were placed on versions with the picture at the bottom, while 125 votes were placed on versions with it in the column (so it was higher up and more easily seen). Yet, when it was placed back down by someone, you did not champion the consensus and move it back up into the column. Why? The consensus on that issue is obvious. So why aren't you helping to implement it? The draft I was trying to implement has little to do with the version I would like to see up there (for example, I actually prefer a search box, even though consensus did not - I believe a way can be found to accomodate both a search box and expanded portal selection). But since expanded portal selection was the consensus as well as no search box, I've been supporting that. We need to set personal preferences aside and implement consensus. That's what you told me you wanted to do, but I've yet to see it. I deferred to your desire for a single draft approach precisely because you said we should implement the features favored in the polls during Round 6. But all I've seen so far is you pushing those features you've always been pushing. Please explain why you are not doing what you said you were going to do. --Go for it! 02:03, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree that you do have some points; however, there are some flaws in your logic. There were 50 votes for the 2 drafts with the POTD on the bottom and 125 for the 6 with it in the column. Do the math: the average per draft works out to 25 and about 20, respectively. Furthermore, those drafts with the picture in the column were done first so the people who voted for them might have liked the picture on the bottom. It's also less of a shift from what we have now. IMHO, it looks better because you can resize it easier, but that has no more merit than anyone else's. Ultimately, however, none of the drafts specifically voted on where to place the picture. rather, they were package deals with more than one independant (an uncontrolled) variable. People may not have voted for the drafts with slightly less because they disliked another feature but liked the search bar or POTD on the bottom.

I say let's have spearate, controlled mini polls (like the header poll, just advertised better). the header poll, though it did not attract a lot of voters, still had the search bar win (admittedly by a hair, but this was a controlled poll). The drafts were a rough idea of what was good and what wasn't; but we're now fine tuning and we need more specific censuses (censi?) to tell what people want.

I will accept any decision made by a controlled straw poll on any issue that arises, assuming it has only one variable (part of the page) and a good ammount of people vote on it in a good legnth of time. (That is, any poll that tests one thing that's administered fairly by rules of common sense).--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 02:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Go for it!: As I've explained to you on several occasions, building "consensus" is not about blindly tallying votes. Aside from the fact that your raw counts are grossly inaccurate (as I noted in a message that you ignored), you're failing to consider various important factors (including the specific comments that were made).

I was promoted to sysop on a platform that was based in part upon my ability to gauge and implement consensus. I'm helping to do so, despite the fact that some of the design elements (such as the standalone headings and search box) do not match by personal preferences.

HereToHelp has lived up to his name. Conversely, many of your edits (while certainly made in good faith) have been counterproductive. I realize that you're attempting to honor consensus, but you simply don't understand what that is. You've misinterpreted the results of the straw poll, and I respectfully request that you take a step back and give my advice some serious consideration. —David Levy 03:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I certainly support that platform: don't make yourself color blind because there always is a gray area, like it or not. I aprreciate and respect you, David, for going against your personal preference to go with the informal consensus (informal meaning that the specific vote counts aren't as valuable as the intention). I also appreciate Go for it! for going with the one draft platform. I still say that the best way to solve this is to hold a straw poll of the specific elements. And although we should not be bound by the exact results, if they are overwhelmingly against my personal ideas, I'll accept them. More likely they'll be in a gray area; we'll sort through that when the time comes.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 03:15, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

David, you've yet to provide a definition of what consensus is. So far as I can tell, your method of reaching consensus is to slug it out with direct edits and reversions. I've yet to see you cite specifics from the discussions. Your statements so far have been general and vague. So where is this magical consensus to which you refer? Let's see it in black and white. Point out the data upon which you base your conclusions as to what the consensus is on the various design elements. --Go for it!

The problem is that there is no black and white answer. Even the drafts are not black and white because people could have voted before they saw the alternatives, or they could have been detered by some other feature. I'm all for a specific poll, but even then we will have to look at the spirit of the votes (why? what did they like? How strongly did they support it?) rather than the simple vote count.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 11:50, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

John Sculley

I've been working on this article about the former CEO of Apple and Pepsi. It will be a great featured article when its done, can you help me out a bit? I just added it to peer review, any of your comments will be useful to me :) — Wackymacs 16:32, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Main Page design notice

The notice was already on there, in the Goings on section. With the template, it's announced twice. I'll move the wording from your notice down into the announcement section (Goings-on). --Go for it!

Sorry. I just glanced over the page and noticed its apparent absence. Just goes to show you that some peopl might not get the message. Also: what was the reason you had to make about 50 edits to redesign the page? It looked just fine how it was.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 23:15, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Apple Macintosh

Hey, I noticed your many contributions to the Apple Macintosh article. Congratulations on it being Today's featured article. --Aude (talk | contribs) 00:39, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I've gotten basically all three of my awards on that.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 00:42, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Good morning!

Saw your post on the bulletin board, and thought I'd say "Hi". --Go for it! 15:33, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry...somehow you seemed to have disappeared. Anyway, how do you like how the draft has turned out?--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 15:55, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Usability/Main Page/Draft

From your edit summary: "Can we just revert this?"

Yes, we can. In fact, I did so two minutes before you saved your revision with the added </div> tag. (You should have received an edit conflict message, but the software has been screwy lately.) Please self-revert back to my last version.

As for the article count link, it's my opinion that this distracts the reader from the task of performing a search. The same link is located in the "Wikipedia languages" section (where it's contextually appropriate). —David Levy 00:09, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

It did register a "partial reversion" where you formatted it differently, but there's nothing about a full revert. I'll go ahead and revert it to the version before AzaToth (12 Portals look really bad), and you can rerevert me if I misinterpreted you.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 00:13, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I called it a "partial reversion" because I left one of AzaToth's edits (a text size reduction) in place. I reverted everything else, and you accidentally undid this (not your fault). As you appear to have discovered, the extra portals were added by Go for it! at an earlier point. —David Levy 00:24, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Wait a moment: it wasn't AzaToth who added the extra Portals? Look, I'm a little confused, can you handle this?--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 00:15, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll take care of it. :-) —David Levy 00:24, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. After adding back some padding the search box looks fine on my screen (my other complaint).--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 00:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Please check your WP:NA entry

Greetings, editor! Your name appears on Wikipedia:List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct:

1. If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
2. If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
3. Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! BD2412 T 04:01, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

No, I'm not yet an admin. I'll look into that, thanks.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 12:03, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm open to the offer, but it will be a while until I break 5,000 edits (Interiot's tool is on top of the page).--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 12:04, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Portals

Hi. I was the one who created the Olympics Portal that you helped out on. You said you knew portals, so I wanted to ask you a question. How often should the infoirmation on the page be changed? About every week? Please send me back a message to tell me this and other tips if possible. Thanks. --Jared 17:19, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

WP:CBB

That was the whole point of the CBB: a place for people to announce their own news and ask for help in launching new projects and portals. I had this idea since summer because I really missed some place to stay tooned in. And just imagine: you are a user, not a newbie but not yet an "oldie." You have this idea to create a portal/project. You are bold and you create it. What next? How to spread the word? Spam user talk pages? How to "brag" that you did something like that? That's where CBB tries to step in and help out. Also, Goings-on or Signposts are very formal and structured and CBB is supposed to be much more relaxed.

It is not really working out the way I really envisioned it. So far there was no news about new proposals, straw pools, etc. Only portals and projects. But I think people like it and there is nothing wrong with it. Renata 02:44, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Yeah, if people just want the basic news, that's what the Signpost is for. I'll put something into the bulletin board now about how we welcome that.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 03:05, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I have edited your edit :) I think it was a little misleading. Requesting assitance is not news. CBB is all about new stuff. Hope you see it. (sorry for un-elaboration, but it's 2am and I need to get up at 7am...) Renata 06:58, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, alright. It's difficult to strike a balance between informality and news.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 12:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, BTW, what do you think about WP:MOTTO? Renata 06:58, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I think "The free encyclopedia", "The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit", and "be bold" are enough.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 12:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Possible admin nomination

I was looking through the WP:NA list to see if there was anyone I recognised, who said they wanted to be an admin. Your name appeared, and I see from your comments above and your userpage that you would like to be an admin. If you want I can take a detailed look at your edit history, userpage, talk page etc with the view to nominating you. Few disclaimers before you reply:

• I will pick out the 'less than perfect', or what might be seen as bad by others, as well as the good.
• I have never nominated anyone for admin before, so you can't check out my record in the matter. In general I have less edits than you, so if you think this will reflect badly don't accept.
• I have voted on various other people's RfA, both support and oppose- always with reasons.
• Agreeing to do the above will almost certainly mean I suggest you change something(s) before nomination. If you don't want this don't accept the offer.
• Success is not guaranteed!

Hope that doesn't sound too awful, I'm just saying I'm not offering you a 'free' nomination! On the other hand if I decide to nominate you, I will put effort into the nomination. Don't expect a one line 'great contributer with x number of edits'... So because of the above I won't be offended if you decline the offer, I'd rather you thought yourself ready rather than being pushed into it too early. Let me know what you think on my talk page. Thanks, Petros471 18:51, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hey HereToHelp, remember I'd always support you because I've known you for quite some time on Wikipedia and have worked with you on several articles - I'm sure you wouldn't abuse the administrator powers on Wikipedia. :) — Wackymacs 19:47, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate that.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:23, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply on my talk page. I will start reviewing your edits. Don't worry about rushing, I'm going to take this quite slow, so you'll have plenty of time to prepare answers. Also I'll have some questions for you first. First point, I just tried your email link and see that you do not have email enabled. Quite a few people will oppose you purely for that, so could you please add an address/enable people to use it in your preferences. Petros471 21:36, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay. I'll look into that.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:38, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

When you've enabled your email let me know (on my talk page, or send me one). Alternatively if you see I'm active on Wikipedia message me and we can meet on IRC. Petros471 15:22, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Is there a specific page about the email policy?--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 18:47, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Can't find one, so no I don't think there is a specific page about email policy. However I have seen plenty of RfA oppose votes because the potential admin has email disabled. Also WP:GRFA (a guide not policy) mentions "There are also several other things that contributors will raise, such as whether you have an email address set. This is important for administrators, who may need to be contacted by users who have been blocked from editing." The message blocked users get tells them that they can email the admin who carried out the block (as they can't message you on your talk page).

Are you online now? If so want to go on IRC #wikipedia and I'll message you there? Petros471 20:54, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm online, but I don't have a clue how to use IRC. I did find this: [1]--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Try this: http://yossman.net/byxnet/webchat.freenode/irc.cgi Type in HereToHelp as your username, then click login. I'll try messaging you in there. Petros471 21:20, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm confused. Really confused. I got in, but I have no idea what to do.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:37, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

(reseting indent) Can you see me in there? Try typing "/msg Petros471 Hello" without the quotes. Then go into the new window that opens called 'Petros471' Petros471 21:43, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I see the window, I've just done what you told me to. I don't see a response.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:45, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Mmmm, strange. Did you see me just type testing321? Can you see a window that says 123 from me? Petros471 21:48, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I've responded. You haven't.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:49, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Shoot I just lost it. My fault.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:53, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Lost what? When you say I haven't responded, was that when you tried saying something in the same window that I typed '123'? Petros471 21:56, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I waited about five minutes and then quit. (I hit some key and lost the window)--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 22:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Questions

Well maybe we should leave it for now then if we can't get it to work (though I don't know what the problem is...). I was going to ask some general questions about admin stuff, and discuss a few specifics. Probably the most important is the first general question:

"1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with?..."

And my variation on that question:

"What is it you want to do as an admin that you can't do at the moment?"

Feel free to answer those here, on my talk page or by email. Petros471 22:13, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Interesting answer, thanks. That's good enough for me, thought I think there are still some other things that could get picked up on a RfA that would be best to clear up first. I'm off for the night now so I'll get back to you over within a few days. Might be worth trying IRC again another time- would you be willing to try looking at List of IRC clients (or you could just download Opera (browser), which is what I use- and includes a built in IRC client) and an irc tutorial. That might mean we can get to talk real time another time, which would be a lot more convenient. Petros471 23:00, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you for supporting me in my successful RFA. The admin tools will definitely be useful for dealing with vandalism. Needless to say, if you notice me doing something not quite right or have questions about any of my actions, please drop me a note on my talk page. Thanks. --Aude (talk | contribs) 15:46, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

No problem.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for dropping me a line

Thank you for saying thank you...

I am really having trouble with wikipedia, i dont know how it works... waaaa!

But then again i am only 3 days old lol! So what can i expect.

I am glad that i found the Macintosh project, i am truley interested in Apple, even though my recent suggestions on Steve jobs and my intro quip may suggest otherwise..

I hope to see you around! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crampy20 (talk • contribs)

No problem.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 22:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Main Page redesign

If I was a sysop, I'd do these myself, but alas I am not, so I'll have to come to you.

We should protect the draft from editing during the election so the vote remains valid. Also, can you put a notice of the election (one it is underway) on the watchlists, like they did for ArbCom? Surely this is of equal importance as that. Thanks.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 23:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I intend to protect the draft and the featured picture templates before the election begins. In my opinion, Main Page is a more logical location for the notice, given the fact that its users are the ones who would be most affected by the redesign. Also, this would be far less likely to annoy uninterested users. —David Levy 00:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Touche, the watchlists would get annoying, but many people have objected to a notice on the actual Main Page itself. We'll have to make so with the CBB and the Main Page talk (and possibly the Signpost).--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 00:10, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I can guarantee that a watchlist notice would generate far more complaints than a main page notice would. As long as we get a decent turnout (which we obviously will, given the response to the search box straw poll), we should be all right. —David Levy 00:18, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 00:19, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Extra <br/> tag

I tried removing the extra <br/> tag from the design page, but it's there for a reason... without it, there's no spacing between the header and the tabs at the very top. --Aude (talk | contribs) 00:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I did an expiriment with the sandbox to see if that was the case and it was not. But if some people have a problem with it, let it be.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 00:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Google Curling.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Google Curling.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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.

Signpost template

It was just a test template. Once we've figured out what looks good, then I can work with the folks over at the Signpost concerning forking the template data stream. The Signpost template is overformatted for this page. No worries. --Go for it! 06:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

What do you think about this...

I found the moving of the Portal:Featured content to Wikipedia:Featured content rather strange. What do you think about it? --Go for it! 11:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

The thing is, now that it's been moved I can't find a version of the page before the move!--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 22:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

You have a revert bias

Rather, try to see where others are trying to take things, and assist in the progression. On the community portal, we're going for an integrated design. This means, rather than backtrack, forcing the project back a notch, help to take it forward. Rather than reverting to the old format, you could have helped the test-run by copying the updated data onto the test template. Instead, your reversion bias had you go backtrack to the old template. Maybe it's not a bias, maybe you are agendizing. Time will tell. By the way, do you have an agenda regarding this?

The Signpost template is "overformatted" with respect to the comm portal. Therefore a new template is called for. The Signpost template should be forked, but before we go to the Signpost's staff with a proposal, we should have the design of the fork completely worked out. At this time, we (Renata and I) are still tinkering with it. The fact that the Signpost template is currently updated on a more consistent schedule is irrelevant, since we are working toward that end as well. A week ago, the CBB didn't even sport the Signpost at all. And if the CBB, and by extension the Community Portal, is going to have a new feature, that feature might as well fit in every way, including formatting. It might be a minor point, but it is the details which make the difference between mediocre and excellent design.

Gray is just off. Besides, each updating of the test template gives us another whole week to play with it. So what's it going to be? Are you going to help or hamper development? The choice is up to you: cooperate or compete? Which do you prefer? Are you going to help us, or fight us? Do you just want to argue, or would you rather assist? --Go for it! 10:39, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Wait just a moment! That last paragraph seems to violate WP:NPA and WP:AGF. I do not have an agenda. I merely was confused as to why you were reverting to a version that would require more upkeep from Ral and the others. How about putting up the main template now, tweaking the new one (and moving it to something other than "test template"), and THAN implement it. Unless, of course, it's ready and just needs to be kept updated.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

Dear HereToHelp:

You have the honor of being the second person to respond to my survey!

Thank you for your participation. Your responses to the survey are much appreciated!

The final essay should be posted on my user page no later than March 27. Stay tuned!!!

Shuo Xiang 13:23, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Scientific peer review

Thank you very much for finding and posting a logo! I was going to do this and earlier browsed through some featured pics for inspiration. I think your choice sums up what we are aiming to achieve in a neat and efficient manner. Thanks again, Oldak Quill 22:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Your welcome. I was afraid that it would get objected to (hence the defensive edit summary), but I guess not. Sorry I'm not qualified to be on the board. This looks like an interesting way to help mitigate Wikipedia's Achilles heel and I wish you the best of luck with it.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 01:20, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Heretohelp, you ROCK!

I was gone just a few minutes, and the tip was complete! It's symbiotic, man. --Go for it! 03:58, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. However, that tip will be useless to most people becuase most people (sadly, IMHO) don't use Macs. May I recommend having both the Windows tip and the Mac tip under one banner?--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 04:12, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Gaelic Games

Thanks, if their are any other pointers you can help us out with, it would be much welcomed. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 00:52, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Keep a news section or template for people to check to see what's going on—and keep it updated.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 01:20, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Rock and Roll

Hey thanks a lot for helping. If you don't mind, can you explain to me how to edit in ways clearer than the wikipeida article? Again, thanks. Osbus 23:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for working on it. As much as I appreciate the work (which I appreciate a lot), I am not too crazy over the layout. I did the design on Word, and if you send me your e-mail address(mine is osbus11@yahoo.com), I can send you the doc. Osbus 01:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Just hit "email user" on the toolbox to the left to email people. Put that address in your preferences and than confirm it. You don't need to send me the design, though.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 02:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Quick word of thanks for all your help, especially in solving that mess I made with all the boxes inside boxes at the beginning. Think I've got the hang of most of the formatting now, so hopefully we won't bother you so much in future. Anyway thanksQeee1 23:42, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Those boxes are caused by not having the code ofr the bottom of the boxes. See Wikipedia:Portal for good instructions on how to make a new Portal.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 23:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Website

You the first admin that came to my mind so if do not mind me asking, what should be done with this article MidnightBox.com, Inc.. Its a website article created by the people who run it themselves. Tutmosis 02:00, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm honored but I'm not an admin. I'll be logging off soon, but I can point you to Wikipedia:Notability (websites). That page is meant just for this sort of thing.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 02:23, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

hehe.. Yea I noticed right after the message. Atleast you now know one more person who would support you in your nomination for adminstrator. Tutmosis 02:25, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah...I might do that when I have time on my hands (amazing concept).--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 02:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

inexperience

yes, i understand my lack of wikiexperience but im tryin to bring myself up to date as fast as possible (with out violating the speed of light,ok ok, bad joke!!) but do you have an susgestions Eevo 02:56, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not blaming you. I'm just saying walk before you can run. Rule 1: use correct grammar (most people pardon typos but regular internet slang is not a good idea). Rule 2: take a look at Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset and folow the important links. Rule 3: create a userpage; it turns that link blue and will earn you some easy respect.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 03:00, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

no internet slang. ok, i was only going to use it on talk pages but sure. userpage is coming and im currently reading rule 2 --Eevo 03:06, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

And capitalize properly. I have to go for the night, but the simplified ruleset is a great place to start.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 03:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

To be honest I have no idea what to put on my userpage. I was thinking about putting what I do, (uni + other qualifacations, dj/radio and my intrests (war,politics, etc) Anything else you would recommend?

It can be short. User:David Levy (for example) is an admin but has a fairly short page. Also, there is Wikipedia:Babel and Wikipedia:Userbox.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 11:59, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Or, on the other hand...remove some userboxes! (Jimmy Wales has said that we need to reduce the amount of those things anyway).--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 12:06, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: New Community Portal design

You wrote:
I like the edits you just made (my only complaint being some of the images, which I've fixed). However, can you move the blue border down below the menu, right above the CBB? I don't have a clue how to do that, but it looks bad the way it is now. Other than that, well, Go for it!--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 12:46, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll fiddle with it. By the way, I went through quite a bit of trouble trying to find icons that would balance that menu. I was going for all grayscale, but couldn't find anything for the collaborations that wasn't in color, but since that was in the center, it still balanced out. The colored star you placed in there throws off the balance -- could you create a grayscale version of that star (while maintaining its transparent background)? I would do it, but I can't figure out how to use The Gimp to make backgrounds transparent. Another balancing feature was shape - round shapes were at each end. The extra globe you added throws off the balance in two ways: it puts more round items on the right end, and it adds more "weight" by being a duplicate. Could you please find another icon for article improvement drive? Thank you. In the meantime, I'll mess with the placement of the menu. --Go for it! 13:04, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought those placements were arbitrary. I'll look at the menu, you look at the blue line.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 13:06, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I think I found an icon that solves both problems. It balances color and shape. Let me know what you think. --Go for it! 13:15, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Your changes to the menu balance out good. But there's a problem with the puzzle-globe-with-the-shovel-icon: it's right-hand edge is flat, like someone didn't grab the whole image when they started to work on it. I think you'll agree that the quality of the page design for the Community Portal should be top-notch, and that icon just doesn't look professional. By the way, I worked on your request, and tried putting the menu above the line, but it looks just plain bad -- like it's just hanging out in space. So I stuck it in a sandbox for you to look at: see User:Go for it!/Draft --Go for it! 13:32, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Here's the full-sized image so you can have a closer look: . --Go for it! 13:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Nobody would notice that at the size we're using unless specifically looking. I will, however, send a message to the creator.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 13:46, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

It's quite noticable, actually. In fact, somebody else already took it off. So, I've called in an expert (user:ElAmericano), maybe he can come up with a solution. --Go for it! 18:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I've restored the menu to a uniform grayscale color scheme for the time being. I've asked User:ElAmericano to work up something for us. Just take a look at his user page menu! See the discussion on his talk page. Hopefully, he can come up with something really cool. --Go for it! 19:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

By the way, do you know how to use The Gimp? I can't figure out how to make the background to a grayscale version of the feature star transparent. Do you know how? --Go for it! 19:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure about The Gimp but I can make it transparent, yeah.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:34, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Where's the greyscale image?--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 21:46, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Here it is:

By the way, someone keeps chopping the menu down to 4 items, axing the Article Improvement Drive. I'm running out of reverts. --Go for it! 22:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

That means that they are, too. take it to the (or their) talk page.--HereToHelp 22:50, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Portal

Thanks for helping with the portal - that was exactly what I was thinking of putting there! I'm the creator of the portal, by the way. Thanks again, see you round the 'pedia. (I keep bumping into the same people over and over again... odd.) - Davidpk212 22:34, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Consider changing that blue header color to something else.--HereToHelp 22:36, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Done. Thansk for the opinion! - Davidpk212 22:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

It looks much better now.--HereToHelp 22:45, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi there! I see you've been helpin about a bit on the portal again, so here's a Barnstar for your Barnometer...

		The Original Barnstar
		I award this Barnstar to HereToHelp for assisting with Portal:Radio Davidpk212 19:51, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!--HereToHelp 23:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Aidlogo

I'll actually have to make a new one. The shovel picture at shovel has been replaced with a new public domain image, which irons out the legality a bit. Thanks for the tip; I'll get right on that.

Okay, thanks.--HereToHelp 00:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, . The background is white instead of clear, though... -Litefantastic 00:44, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Drat, my editor can't distinguish between the white of the background and the offwhite of the globe...I can't give it a transparent background (that's probably what happened to you, isn't it?)--HereToHelp 00:49, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I can't fix it either. Damn! -Litefantastic 00:56, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

portal header thing

oh god what did I do Portal:Rock and Roll crapOsbus 02:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

When you mess up, just revert it. Let me see... and I liked the orange...--HereToHelp 02:36, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you really like the orange you can change it I don't particularly like it...btw I have fell for the practical joke thing every time I am on your talkpageOsbus 03:54, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

changed header to sq. ¿es eso aceptable?Osbus 14:52, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Alright.--HereToHelp 15:04, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

portal

yeah, I figured out how to do portals...sry about the long thing on CBBOsbus 00:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Oh, it's also a good idea to use correct spelling and grammar around here.--HereToHelp 01:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)