User talk:Horologium/September 2008

Language user categories

Hi! It's been a while since we last chatted, and I wanted to drop by to ask how you've been.

Also, I remember that you were involved in cleanup of language user categories last year so I want to let you know that I've nominated a number of such categories (I have a few more still-incomplete nominations saved in Notepad which I'll be posting soon) for deletion/merging/renaming. I know that you've chosen to take an indefinite break from UCfD, but if you're interested in these particular discussions and aren't too busy, I'd welcome your thoughts.

I hope your studies are going well. Best, –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 19:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, you got me back. (grin) I expended a lot of effort trying to clean that section up, and I don't want to see it turn into anarchy again. I'm not going to push it right now, but eventually, I'd like to see all of the "national varities" of languages eliminated, especially the ones other than English, since this is the English-language Wikipedia. I still think categorizing users under American/Australian/British/Canadian/Irish/Malaysian/New Zealand/Singapore/South Africa "varieties" of English is idiotic, but I don't know if there is sufficient support to mass-merge them into Category:User en, and I am unwilling to expend the effort that would be required to effect such a change. Horologium (talk) 20:34, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

While I don't think you intended it this way, your use of "half-baked" may be considered inappropriate. Would you mind refactoring? - jc37 22:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I went and changed "half-baked" to "eccentric". That should be a better choice, since it more accurately conveys my concern (the classification is unique to Wikimedia projects). I understand your concern about my potentially insulting turn of phrase. Horologium (talk) 23:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

For now, I intend to focus mostly on getting the subcategories of the national dialect categories upmerged, getting the non-ISO regional dialect categories deleted, and renaming a few category trees to match ISO 639-3. As for the "national varieties" categories, I think I'll do a test nomination as a sort of brainstorming exercise to determine under what conditions (if at all) there is consensus for keeping, deleting, or merging such categories. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

University of Phoenix edits

Hello Horologium,

I'm fairly new to wikipedia. I've been posting maybe six months or so on and off. I've taken interest in the University of Phoenix (and others) article. I've been working through consensus to give the page an air of neutrality it has not previously the case. Last month, all interested parties, prompted by me, worked over the controversies section and combined or cut down the voluminous entries there to a form more logical and readable. This month, user Mysteryquest appeared back on the talk page, announced his displeasure in a general way with the changes, and began editing without using the talk page. He has a history of edit warring on the page, so I stepped lightly with him. One controvercial change he made I protested and insisted (without reverting) that we discuss it on the talk page prior to agreeing to it. The next time he did it I removed the post and put it on the talk page until it was talked through. I would like it if you would take the time to review the situation and advise me on an appropriate course of action. I know this will take time and honestly, I haven't always been in the right in the editing, etc., but I am trying. Am I in the wrong by WP standards? Thanks, --Caernarvon (talk) 23:12, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

James Emanuel AfD

I saw you voted to delete the article James Emanuel. As an editor who has made a large number of edits to that article, I should state that the AfD was created in bad faith by one of the numerous sock puppets who swirl around Dan Schneider. Jame Emanuel is a very notable poet whose papers are in the Library of Congress and has an extensive publication and citation history. Just because sock puppets are fighting on both sides of this Dan Schneider issue is no reason to decide that a notable article should be deleted. Please check out the citations in the article then please reconsider your support for deletion. Thanks.--SouthernNights (talk) 00:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I should add that it would be easy to bring in more references for the article, such as this highly notable citation. Best, --SouthernNights (talk) 01:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I came here to say the same thing. There are lots of sources for this guy: [1]. Zagalejo^^^ 02:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll change my !vote; I missed Zagalejo's link when I posted (I was blinded by the sockpuppet's screed). Horologium (talk) 23:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I totally understand. That's the problem with sock puppets--they cause so much irritation and confusion that it's easy to miss stuff. Many thanks for reconsidering the issue. Best,--SouthernNights (talk) 01:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Babel extension

• Extension:Babel]
• m:Babel extension

You're gonna love this.... not.

It seems that they've created a new extension for babel boxes. (Which includes categories.)

The new "rule" pretty much does away with the -N stating that the "home" category is to only be used for the -N.

And since the "home" categories have been a mis-mosh due to userboxes, we have to "fix" this, before the roll-out happens and all the -N's get merged automatically to the "home" cats.

Before I drop this on WP:BABEL, I thought I'd check on your thoughts first. - jc37 06:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

<groan>

I am *really* not up for dealing with this now. Maybe in three weeks (when one of my classes is done), but not now.

I see they are also attempting to revive the whole -0 category nonsense, which should be nipped in the bud now. As for nuking the -N cats in favor of the unbabelized (base) userboxen, I support that, but I think we'll need a mass MFD on all of the -N userboxen if this proposal goes through, and I don't know if that will be possible. Additionally, there are other template issues (many of the userbox templates categorize users in both the parent category and the numerical category; that will need to be fixed as well). I don't think there is an Excedrin big enough to handle the headache this is going to create... Horologium (talk) 23:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, -0 needs to be deprecated. I'll leave a comment there concerning it.

As for -N, I think the first step would be to remove the -N category from all non -N userboxes.

And at the same time, to remove the "home/parent cat" from all non "home" userboxes.

Just doing those two alone, should fix quite a bit. - jc37 23:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

See: mw:User talk:MinuteElectron. - jc37 23:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

• Ugh. I replied about the 0-level categories, as for nominating these for merging, we will see if I have any time to help with that. Considering my level of Wiki availability lately, that's not too likely. VegaDark (talk) 02:21, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

A part of me wants to get rid of the 0-level language userboxes altogether. WP:BABEL tries to restrict the use of 0-level userboxes for "when there is some reason why you might be expected to know" a language, but it does not strike me as a particularly strong justification, especially since 0-level userboxes are frequently not used in the recommended manner. I know that you all participated/originated the original discussions to remove the 0-level language user categories, so perhaps you could shed some light on this issue?

As for the new extension, will it follow ISO 639 coding? If so, how will it handle categories for non-ISO languages? I notice that both of these issues were raised at m:Babel extension#Opposed, but no response has been given yet. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

The only -0 level userbox that is useful is the one for the language of the encyclopedia (en-0, in this case). For those who edit other language wikipedias without knowing the language, there should be (and usually is) a userbox for those who don't speak that language, which is important. (In fact, after I added a nl-0 to my userpage on the Dutch Wikipedia, the welcoming admin there sent me an English language welcome, rather than the default Dutch welcome.) All the others are useless and take up server time for transclusions. (I have seen userpages with row after row of xx-0 userboxen.) I don't have enough time to participate in a big debate over this issue, but I foresee a lot of problems if this is implemented without fixing all of the likely issues raised here and elsewhere. Horologium (talk) 20:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)