User talk:AstroHurricane001/Archive 32
|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
|Archive 31||Archive 32||Archive 33|
- 1 May 2009
- 1.1 AnnaSophia Robb
- 1.2 Outline of knowledge WikiProject update 05/10/2009
- 1.3 P.S. (AstroHurricane)
- 1.4 Your edit
- 1.5 Contest proposal
- 1.6 Has the shit hit the fan? - WPOOK update, 05/25/2009
- 1.7 MOTD
- 1.8 WPOOK update - 05/27/2009
- 1.9 A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies
Outline of knowledge WikiProject update 05/10/2009
Development is moving steadily forward. We haven't created any new outlines lately, but a lot of editing of our existing outlines is taking place. Take a look at Buaidh's contributions. :)
I can safely say we now have another fanatic working on the project.
Importance of watching
A big danger to new pages or pages that have low traffic are prods. These are deletion proposals that don't have to go through AfD. If a prod sits on a page, any page, 5 days without opposition, the page can be deleted without discussion.
Such pages can be undeleted without discussion too, but there's usually a delay, especially if you don't notice the page missing right away. Prods create undesirable gaps in the subject coverage of list sets.
I just caught one the other day, so keep an eye on the outline pages!
One of the benefits of reverse outlining is the discovery of problems (gaps in coverage, etc.) with the publication being outlined. We've come across several and have been fixing those as we go. Because hypertext tables of contents are only as good as the pages they link to, we've been cleaning up large sections of Wikipedia. This was something I did not foresee when I started this project.
One of the sets of pages we link to on the outlines is the set of indexes, formerly called "List of x topics". Unfortunately, the lists of topics were divided between 2 different sets competing for the same article names, and this impeded development of both sets. One of those sets were indexes, and the rest are outlines (more about these below).
So I set about splitting up the 2 sets, by renaming the indexes to "Index of x articles" or "Index of x-related articles".
All 450 or so of them.
Nobody has complained about the new names, but 2 or 3 people thought I was way too bold to attempt this without a proposal or discussion first. Just 2 or 3 people. That's about as much opposition as you could expect for moving a single page.
Not bad for a move of this volume.
There are many more indexes out there, but our main concern are those which are provided links on the outlines. Many of those are redlinks (gaps in coverage as mentioned above), and so we need a way to track these and direct editor attention to them so that somebody creates them...
So, I've created a page for the set, that parallels the OOK list:
The complete list of "Index of" articles can be found at User:The Transhumanist/Index, and this list needs to be gone over to make sure each article index listed is included on the portal page above. If you help with this, please put - placed after each entry that you check and place.
To further support the development of index pages, and provide a central place for people to go to find out more about indexes and what needs to be done, I've created the Index WikiProject.
There are outline pages hiding all over Wikipedia. They aren't in OOK's formats, but we can fix that. :)
Converting existing outlines and absorbing them into the OOK is a lot easier than creating outlines from scratch, and it avoids unnecessary duplication of effort. But before we can convert them, we have to find them...
A hunt is underway for non-OOK outlines. So far, User:Gimme danger is in the lead and has found the most. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge#The hunt for hidden outlines for more information.
Please don't rename any non-standard outlines you come across to OOK's standard naming until after you reformat them. Renaming them only after they are reformatted helps us keep track of which outlines have and have not been converted.
The way I usually do this is by substituting the relevant outline generator template at the beginning of the outline, which forces the existing outline to the bottom of the page. Then I add an "under construction" tag, and then move all the links from the original outline to the relevant sections in the standard structure. It is important to finish the conversion quickly, so as not to create confusion. Then I scour Wikipedia for missing links (using Google to do a site-specific search of Wikipedia), to make the upgraded outline more comprehensive than the converted outline. Be sure to check all related categories too. Add a lead paragraph, add external links, and voila!
Better than before.
Where we're heading
The next phase in the evolution of this project is to increase participation by expanding the Wikipedia community's awareness of the Outline of knowledge, its purpose, and what needs to be done for any given subject.
This will entail placing banners on the outlines' talk pages, the talk page for the WikiProject associated with the subject of each outline and of each planned outline, and on the talk page of each article corresponding to each outline and to each planned outline.
Then instructions on improving subject access, including the creation and development of an outline for each subject, will be posted on every related WikiProject page. (There's a WikiProject for the subject of most outlines).
We will also be sending notices to every member of every WikiProject associated with the subject of each and every outline and planned outline.
But before this happens, the outline guidelines and the article draft for the topic "Outline" must be completed. Without these, many editors will not know what an outline is, or what to do to build and improve them.
And that's our current bottleneck.
Once those are ready (the guideline and article), we can take this project to the next level.
Keep up the good work
Well, that's all for now.
Until next time,
The Transhumanist 00:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
You don't have anything to do with the hurricane WikiProject do you? Just curious.
If you do, then it might interest you that we don't yet have an Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge/Drafts/Outline of hurricanes.
Keep in mind that we need outlines on every major subject. Like Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge/Drafts/Outline of earthquakes.
Feel free to create an outline on any major subject you are interested in.
("Major subject" is being used loosely here. I mean any subject extensive enough to support an outline).
The Transhumanist 00:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
A proposal has been posted for a contest between all 200 country WikiProjects. We need to know how this contest should be run, and what problems to look out for. And we're looking for judges, coordinators, ideas, and feedback.
(And we have some really cool awards for the contest).
The Transhumanist 17:49, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Has the shit hit the fan? - WPOOK update, 05/25/2009
We've started the next phase
I was experiencing mental block on the article draft for "outline" and on the outline guideline draft. And this was holding the whole project back. Without these (which are intended to explain the type of lists known as outlines in detail), the danger is higher that a controversy could go the wrong way.
I requested help on them, but there was none forthcoming.
So I went ahead and started us on the next phase of operations without those 2 pages...
Our AWB'ers and I have placed about 1600 notices all over Wikipedia. And the plan is to place several thousand more.
This generated only one complaint, but it was a very vocal one, and attracted a few other detractors who seemed unfamiliar with the concept of hierarchical outlines and their benefits. However, just as many or more editors came to the defense of the OOK, and there was no consensus formed. But, dab is still trying to rally opposition to outlines at the Village Pump. See below...
Administrator noticeboard incident and Village Pump policy discussion
It appears that the banner placed on the talk page of the Outline of Switzerland caught the attention of an editor named Dbachmann who posted a rather forceful message on my talk page, another on WT:WPOOK, another at WP:VPP, and still another at WP:AN!
He went well out of his way to use negative hype to cause a stir.
It appears that Mr. Bachmann doesn't understand the nature of hierarchical outlines and their applications. And though he implied that he has never seen an OOK outline before, he was involved with a discussion on these when they were called "lists of basic topics".
His primary argument is that outlines are content forks of articles, and violate WP:CFORK.
But "topic lists", of which outlines are a type, have been around for almost as long as Wikipedia, and fall under the WP:LISTS and WP:STAND guidelines. They aren't intended as forks, as they are lists, bringing the benefits of lists to the corresponding subjects, such as grouping and navigation.
Someone suggested an MfD, but lists are articles, and are within the jurisdiction of AfD. Only the portal page, which merely lists the outline articles, falls within the scope of the MfD department.
The administrator's noticeboard was considered the wrong venue for the discussion, and the discussion was closed.
But Dab's discussion at the Village Pump is still active. Hopefully level heads will prevail there too.
Am I disheartened or deterred? Hell no. I say "full steam ahead!"
Over the next week or two, we'll be posting another 1600 or so notices. It's a good thing we didn't send out 10,000 of them all at once. :)
The Transhumanist 23:51, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
P.S.: Another related thread has popped up at WP:VPR#OoK's expediency. --TT 04:34, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Would be gatreful if you have any ideas for mottos. Please help at WP:MOTD/N. Also see Wikipedia talk:Motto of the day/Archive 5#Archival Simply south (talk) 21:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
WPOOK update - 05/27/2009
For the number of notices we posted (over a thousand) the number of complaints we received (the two VP threads mentioned above) was quite low.
Considering most of the outlines are orphans, they get pretty good use.
Note that people who are happy with articles on Wikipedia generally don't say anything, so I simply interpret it as positive feedback.
Traffic, traffic comparison, and increasing traffic
Using Traffic, I compare the traffic of articles, their corresponding outlines, and their corresponding portals from time to time.
Outlines are starting to catch up to portals. Though the main portals, which are included in a navbar menu at the top of most portals are still way ahead of their outline counterparts.
Both outlines and portals are way behind the articles on the same subjects. Articles usually have 20 to 30 times the traffic.
Keep in mind that most outlines are orphans, with the primary link to them being Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge.
Traffic should improve once we include links on the corresponding subject pages, including the main subject as well as subjects that correspond to subheadings (e.g., History of x, and in the case of countries: Geography of x, Demographics of x, Culture of x, etc.)
I'm convinced the traffic of outlines will overtake portals once we've link-integrated them into the encyclopedia. And since outlines serve as tables of contents for each subject, it seems most fitting to place links to them in the form of hatnotes at the top of each subject's main articles (and the sub-subjects mentioned in the paragraph directly above).
By the way, there's another traffic counter called Wikirank, but I haven't tested it out much yet, but will do so in the coming weeks.
Going for the Main Page
Once the traffic of outlines has overtaken portals, it will be time to replace portals on the Main Page, even if we need to spearhead a new main page redesign! This isn't a far-fetched idea. I was the one who jumpstarted and led the project responsible for the current main page design (until it hit critical mass and attracted other leaders), and I was also the most active editor on that project. I even created the WP:CBB on the Community Portal to promote the main page election. The second time around should be easier.
Back to the here and now
Targetting the Main Page is a few months off.
Right now, we need to continue posting notices and start link-integrating the OOK into the encyclopedia.
I have a whole slew of AWB tasks to assign. I hope you are ready. :)
Spread the word
WP:WPOOK needs members. Tell all your friends about the OOK, and get them to join.
The Transhumanist 02:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies
Hi. I have emailed you to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change. If interested, please email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 15:03, 31 May 2009 (UTC)