User talk:Doc Quintana/Archive 2

Ospina Coffee
Hi Doc, I need your help once again. If you could teach me once how to cite or reference, I would do it from there on.

I have translated and copied the following paragraph, and wish to insert in my main article. Please show me how.

THE FOURTH NATIONAL CONGRESS OF COFFEE GROWERS In December of 1930, the Fourth National Congress of Coffee Growers convened in Bogota. Due to the vast knowledge and experience in the coffee industry, acquired running his own coffee business, Mariano Ospina Pérez was summoned by the Minister of Industry, Francisco J. Chaux, and by President Rafael Olaya Herrera to preside over this Congress. Ospina Perez was elected President of the Congress and at the adjournment of the same, was elected as “Gerente de la Federación” (General Director). He served in this position for four years, until 1934. 1.	Mariano Ospina Pérez, Un Hombre de Acción y de Principios, Miguel Angel Lozano, Fundación de Estudios Historicos, Misión Colombia, Funadación Mariano Ospina Pérez, Editorial El Globo SA, Bogotá, Colombia, November, 1991, page 61.

Thank you very much, --Grancafé 01:15, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Please see User:Grancafe/Ospina Coffee Company Thanks, --Grancafé 01:27, 4 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grancafe (talk • contribs)

PS. What does this mean: Cite error: There are tags on this page, but the references will not show without a tag. Thanks, --Grancafé 01:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Please see User:Grancafe/Ospina Coffee Company Thanks, --Grancafé 01:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grancafe (talk • contribs) 01:26, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Another question: Can I transfer this paragraph to the main article? Mariano Ospina Rodríguez During the later part of the 1830s and in the 1840s, a number of politicians, journalists and scolars railed at New Granada educators and students for their lack of interest in technical or practical education. One of the individuals who expressed most concern was Mariano Ospina Rodríguez, who as Secretary of the Interior dominated the Herrán administration (1841-1845). [1] --Grancafé 01:36, 4 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grancafe (talk • contribs)


 * Hi Doc, Thank you for your message. It has not been easy to keep it up. Flowanda deleted a few paragraphs down. I have been trying to reinstate two of the deleted paragraphs. Kindly please take a look at this and advise on what I should do.
 * In December of 1930, the Fourth National Congress of Coffee Growers convened in Bogotá. Due to the vast knowledge and experience acquired by Mariano Ospina Pérez in the coffee industry, as a result of running his own coffee business, he was summoned by the Minister of Industry Francisco J. Chaux and by President Rafael Olaya Herrera to preside over this Congress. Ospina Pérez was elected President of this Fourth Congress. At the adjournment of this Congress, Ospina Pérez was elected, by the unanimous vote of the delegates, as “Gerente de la Federación” (General Director). He served in this position for four years, until 1934.[40][41]
 * In 1954, during the election of members of the Board of Directors (of the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia), Mariano Ospina Pérez, who served as President of the Republic from 1946 to 1950, was elected and installed as President of the Board of Directors. His return to the Federation marked the reappearance of one of Colombia's greatest coffee names, in an active role, in the History of Colombia's coffee industry.[23][42]


 * Dear Flowanda, please allow me further elaborate here. What I am trying to convey and stress with these two paragraphs is the fact that if the Government, the Federation and the coffee growers of Colombia trusted Mariano Ospina Pérez to run the affairs of the nation’s coffee industry, it was because of his experience, knowhow and successful achievements, proven in the handling of his Ospina coffee business. These two paragraphs are not my words. These are direct quotes from the sources and references. It is essential to explain that his unanimous election to these positions was due to his administrative and entrepreneurial successes in his private coffee business and personal affairs. Thanks for your consideration. Thanks for your consideration.

Thanks again. Best, --Grancafé (talk) 00:59, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Doc, I just saw a response from Flowanda. Please go to my Talk:Ospina Coffee Company and see what she says. There are some issues about Conflict of interest, sourcing and edits since AfD was withdrawn and Clarity concerning family business and company and "According to its history, the company has only been in existence since the early 2000s and is based in the United States. I can find no references to the company name other than the few from product listings and regional articles and none in what little I could see from the article's book references. The family has a long and interesting history and influence in the Colombian coffee industry, but notability can't be inherited or renamed". Please take a look at my response and please let me know if there is anything else I should ad or discuss. Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 02:55, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

John Mandel
I added two references to John Mandel. You may want to revisit the AfD. - Eastmain (talk) 22:59, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey!
What's the idea? :) --JayHenry (talk) 03:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Hippocampus (journal)
Hi -- you replaced a notability tag on this article which I created yesterday, with an edit comment saying, "No specific notability standard for academic journals at WP:N, but citation of the other journals would be sufficient to move it along for consensus". I don't understand what sort of citation of other journals you are talking about -- could you clarify please? (You can reply here, I'll watch this page.) Regards, Looie496 (talk) 23:30, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. Just place a link to where the journal is mentioned on those other journals. You're probably right with them being on the website, to be honest I didn't check, just want to make sure it's verifiable easily for someone skimming through the article. Doc Quintana (talk) 04:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I guess I'm stupid today, but I still don't see what "other journals" you are referring to. Everything in the article can be verified in seconds by going to the journal's web site.  Can I just remove the notability tag, please?  Regards, Looie496 (talk) 16:37, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Following up, I see that Crusio removed the tag on the grounds that the impact factor is greater than 5, so unless you want to continue to contest this, I don't see a need for any more action. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 16:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I apologize for the inconvenience, you're right, I should have checked the site. My apologies. Doc Quintana (talk) 21:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

David Leon Block
There's never been an article on David Leon Block. What article did you mean? Nyttend (talk) 03:21, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Ahh, I see; you mean "David Leon Block". Not sure what template you could use; perhaps you could just say something in your own words?  Nyttend (talk) 03:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

tb ant ty
  smithers  - talk   03:50, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

You can take this too:

   smithers  - talk   03:50, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Brown v. Coakley
I accidently edited over som of your edits. I think i got them all fixed, but you should prolly take a look at them. Thanks, Chamberlian (talk) 04:46, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries. It'll take awhile to get 'em all in there anyway. Doc Quintana (talk) 04:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Municipal results
If you'd prefer, I can update the script I used to fill in the municipal results data so that it adds party shading as appropriate. It should take less than 15 minutes, and would spare you lots of tedium. Emw (talk) 20:45, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. I didn't mind the tedium until now, it was a fun little side project before the frustration set in. Sorry for the hassle. Doc Quintana (talk) 20:46, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

The Grand Coffee Vizir Barnstar Award
PS. This is a better one. Thanks for all your help and kindness. Best, --Grancafé (talk) 00:50, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Your question on ERs
Can I assume that as you are asking a question on several of the ERs, that you plan on doing some reviews? It would certainly be helpful for there to be a few new reviewers there, as at the moment there are only a few people who do any! -- Phantom Steve /talk &#124;contribs \ 10:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Your question
Thanks for your question on my editor review. I answered the question you posed. Feel free to ask for any clarification, etc., should it be necessary. Thanks! -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 05:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Help
helpme Hi, i'm looking for an edit counter that tracks how a user "votes" on afds
 * Hi Doc Quintana, there's not a tool that is able to show this, however, there is one that shows how users' have voted in RfAs (http://toolserver.org/~soxred93/rfap), so an AfD vote counter may not be far behind, SpitfireTally-ho! 06:58, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi there. You can learn more about general edit counters at WikiProject edit counters.  However, a tool that can analyze a user's general edit trend (showing whether he generally votes positively or negatively) consumes a lot of system resources -- you first have to parse a user's contributions for AfD-page edits, then parse for the user's name and use some sort of heuristic to figure out whether or not the user voted in favor of the deletion or against it.  There are a lot of AfD's, so a lot of data and text to parse.  Some people have tools like that that they're written for their personal use and someone like User:Betacommand could run a query like that for you on a particular person if there was a need for it, but in general they're not really used.  If you wanted to look into getting your own server, then parsing the data on your own after getting a Wikipedia data dump so that it doesn't eat up Wikipedia resources, please contact me on my talk page (link in my signature) and let me know and I'll help walk you through those steps. :)  Have a good day, Banaticus (talk) 07:10, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, oh well. Thanks guys! Doc Quintana (talk) 00:28, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * My pleasure, let me know if I can be of further assistance. :) Banaticus (talk) 00:28, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

My Editor Review
I wanted to let you know that I have left a reply to your question here. Cheers, D u s t i SPEAK!! 20:23, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

I Need Serious Help!
Hi Doc, I need your valuable help again. I have earnestly tried to respond to all the questions and concerns of Flowanda, but she seems to be very adamant in her opinion about my Ospina coffee article. Please go to Talk:Ospina Coffee Company and read our interaction. She states that my article is poorly sourced and promotional. I don't think so and I strongly disagree with her opinion. There is nothing promotional, just sheer facts! To whom should I bring these issues for further discussion? Thank you very much for your kindness and insightful advice.


 * I hope I have answered your questions and concerns. I am doing my best to improve and better my article, and I am grateful that I have found editors like Doc Quinatana, Ikip and Largoplazo to help me with this complicated process. I extend my gratitude to you as well for your help. Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 02:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * In the end, this article has survived one afd, I see no issue with notability concerns after we've gotten it cleaned up. Doc Quintana (talk) 03:09, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The AfD was withdrawn when the article was reduced to this. The article has been again expanded by the original COI editor into a poorly sourced (i.e. not easily checked) promotional article. Flowanda | Talk 03:13, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Folowing the advice of Ikip, I posted help messages on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink/Beverages Task Force/Coffee and Tea task force, User talk:Jerem43 and User talk:Iateasquirrel, but have received no response yet. I really need some expert help here. I have done my best, but I can’t go any further without some experienced and reliable help. Thank you very much for your fine cooperation and help. Truly, --Grancafé (talk) 01:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


 * PS. My apologies. On January 29, 2010, Jerem43 (blah blah • I did it!) gave Flowanda a very nice, articulated and eloquent response. Please see Talk:Ospina Coffee Company. Thanks to all of you who have supported this project. Best, --Grancafé (talk) 02:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey Doc
There is now some actual actual suggested text on the incivility block proposal. I've really tried to take on board your comments about a uniform policy, but I know that you may not agree. I'd really like to get your feedback on this one, if that's possible? Anyway, thanks for participating in the discussion so far :-) - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 14:01, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Ospina Coffee and the Colombian Coffee Federation
Hi Doc, Largoplazo just deleted and removed an entire section of the main article Ospina Coffee Company. In my opinion, this has mutilated the article and I am wondering if he has an ulterior motive. Please review his edit, comment and advice. Where do I raise this matter for further discussion?? There has to be a higher authority than these random editors. Kindly please tell me how to elevate the level of discussion on this matter. To whom do I appeal his deletion? Thanks,--Grancafé (talk) 13:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

On That Other Section
You can put it back if you want, but I think the key would to be making it about the company rather than the family or the Columbian Coffee Growers Association, since those are two different topics. Doc Quintana (talk) 13:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Doc, thank you very much for your kind and prompt response. I truly appreciate your help.


 * What I am trying to convey and stress here is the fact that if the Government, the Federation and the coffee growers of Colombia trusted Mariano Ospina Pérez to run the affairs of the nation’s coffee industry, it was because of his experience, knowhow and successful achievements, proven in the handling of his Ospina coffee business. These are not my words. These are direct quotes from the sources and references. It is essential to explain that his unanimous election to these positions was due to his administrative and entrepreneurial successes in his private coffee business and personal affairs.


 * Please realize the close relationship between Ospina Coffee, the Colombian Coffee Federation and the Ospinas, in particular the leadership and administration of Mariano Ospina Perez. The Federation exists because the Ospinas and Ospina Coffee and not the other way around, Ospina Coffee because of the Coffee Federation.
 * I don’t want to put it back on my own initiative, because this would create an antagonistic confrontation. I need an experienced, well educated and well respected editor to do this. Is there any task force or appeal body that could do an independent review of the matter? Where can I find a helping Task Force on this matter? Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 14:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll see what I can do to connect those other two topics to the company itself, and i'll talk to the other editor and try to find an appropriate task force as well.


 * I'll read up on what you put there and see what I can find elsewhere, but in the meantime what can you tell me about those other two topics through the lens of the company itself? Doc Quintana (talk) 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Doc, thanks a lot! The History of Ospina Coffee, the Ospina family and the Colombian Federation of Coffee growers is so intertwined, interrelated and interconnected that it is completely inappropriate to separate them. For example, if one is writing about the History of the presidency of George Washington and excludes his military campaigns that brought him there, one is not been truthful. One cannot try to isolate facts and truths when they are so intertwined. A half truth is not the truth. One can have a myopic approach or a wide-angle view. I hope I have properly expressed my rationale and logic analysis as to these two topics. Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 18:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

History of the Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia
In August 25, 1920, the First National Congress of Coffee Growers convened in Bogotá, presided by Epifánio Montoya, Alfredo Vásquez Cobo and Don Tulio Ospina Vásquez. This congress laid the foundation for the successful organization and establishment of the Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia (English: National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia).

The Second National Congress of Coffee Growers convened in Medellín in 1927. Two sons of Don Tulio Ospina Vásquez, Rafael Ospina Pérez and Mariano Ospina Pérez, were among the delegates of the province of Antioquia. Rafael Ospina Pérez presided over this Congress, which created the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia.

In 1928, after the Second National Congress of Coffee Growers had created the Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia, the first regional committee was established as the “Comité de Cafeteros de Antioquia”. Mariano Ospina Pérez was its first President, and the first registered member of the association.

The first Board of Directors of the newly organized Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia assembled in Bogotá, in August 3, 1929. Its first members were Mariano Ospina Vásquez, Alberto Camilo Suárez, Gabriel Ortiz Williamson, Carlos Caballero, Jesús del Corral and Mariano Ospina Pérez, the greatest dignitary in the History of the Federation, for whom the organization of the national coffee industry was one of his most serious and ambitious concerns.

The first Board of Directors of the newly organized Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia assembled in Bogotá, in August 3, 1929. Its first members were Mariano Ospina Vásquez, Alberto Camilo Suárez, Gabriel Ortiz Williamson, Carlos Caballero, Jesús del Corral and Mariano Ospina Pérez, the greatest dignitary in the History of the Federation, for whom the organization of the national coffee industry was one of his most serious and ambitious concerns.

In December of 1930, the Fourth National Congress of Coffee Growers convened in Bogotá. Due to the vast knowledge and experience in the coffee industry, acquired running his own coffee business, Mariano Ospina Pérez was summoned by the Minister of Industry, Francisco J. Chaux, and by President Rafael Olaya Herrera to preside over this Congress. Ospina Pérez was elected President of this Fourth Congress. At the adjournment of this Congress, Ospina Pérez was elected, by the unanimous vote of the delegates, as “Gerente de la Federación” (General Director). He served in this position for four years, until 1934.

In the election of members of the Board of Directors in 1954, Mariano Ospina Pérez, who served as President of the Republic from 1946 to 1950, was installed as President of the Board of Directors (of the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia). His return to the Federation marked the reappearance of one of Colombia's greatest coffee names in an active role in the industry.

Under Mariano Ospina Pérez' aegis, the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia successfully consolidated the nation's coffee industry and promoted it in the world markets to great effect. Colombia became the largest producer of prime Coffea arabica coffee in the world. He laid a very solid corporative foundation, and today, the Colombian Coffee Federation congregates and supports over 500,000 independent coffee growers and small farmers.

Hi Doc, I posted this article on the page of the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia with references, but I a getting a message that there are no references. Why is this. Please advise. Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 03:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Stop making COI edits now

 * Hi Doc, What does this mean? How do I respond to this accusation? Does it mean I am disqualified to write about the subject matters that I know best and which I am the most qualified authority? To whom do I appeal this charge? Would it be possible to find a Task Force to review this case from an independent and neutral point of view? Please tell me how to further this appeal to a higher body. Thanks for your help, advise and cooperation. Best, --Grancafé (talk) 16:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Let's Have a Proper Forum discuss these Issues
Thank you very much for all your advice, guidance, help, efforts and recommendations. I do NOT wish to have any sort of altercation or confrontation. I have tried to make my contributions based on historical facts and information available in the public domain. I have not posted my own words, thoughts or opinions. They are mere historical and undeniable facts, taken from reliable and accessible sources, mainly History books and industry publications. I know that most of these sources are in Spanish, and thus, I have offered to present copies or pdfs of the same for review. Nevertheless, there are some pretty good and reliable sources in English as well. I may not have quoted or referenced them perfectly, but they are there, accessible, reliable and easy to find and read. I have also requested several individual editors, groups and task forces to review and proof-read the article. I am not insisting or pushing for biased thoughts, ideas or opinions. I am only interested in facts and neutral and truthful information. This is precisely why I have insistently asked for help and invited contributions and editors to participate in the discussion and project. What I do not appreciate is the unfounded and unjustified mutilation of the article. I welcome, invite and ask for independent, neutral and experienced editing help, specifically from those from academia, historians and well versed editors. I apologize if my level of writing, contribution and editing is not at your same level. I would like to take these issues to the proper forum for discussion and resolution. Thank you very much. --Grancafé (talk) 00:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The Big Picture
I am trying to convey that there are two ways to view an idea or concept, the myopic and narrow view and the broad and wide angle. I am proposing to reintroduce into the main article the entire section (here above) entitled “Impact on the Colombian Coffee Industry”, to reveal how Ospina Coffee has influenced and impacted both, the national coffee industry and the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia.

You are not getting the idea. I gave you the example of Harvard University and its alumni. You responded saying that those are to separate issues. I don’t agree with your opinion, but I admit that it was not a very good example. So let me try again. Please go to the webpage of Harvard University (http://www.harvard.edu/),  then go to their page called Harvard and the Community (http://www.community.harvard.edu/), and then go to their section on Economic Impact (http://www.community.harvard.edu/economic_impact.php). There you will find an in-depth, comprehensive and exhaustive article covering this most important and relevant matter.

Now, you tell me why Ospina Coffee is forbidden and disqualified to present its socio-economic impact on Colombia’s coffee industry and in particular in regards to the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia? I truly believe that we must invite community members from academia, scholars, historians, economist and sociologist to participate in this discussion. Perhaps I am not the person most qualified to write this article due to my language and encyclopedic limitations, but the historical and socio-economic facts of the matter are undeniable, most relevant and fundamental. This is why I have insistently invited other well versed and trained editors to participate in this project. Don’t you agree? Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 01:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Dispute Resolution
There is no conflict of interest here. That is your misguided opinion. My utmost interest is the truth and the undisputed, undeniable and well referenced historical facts. The interest of Wikipedia, academia end the community are above your interest or mine. This is why I have insistently invited other well versed and trained editors to participate in this project. I truly believe that we must invite community members from academia, scholars, historians, economist and sociologist to participate in this discussion. Do you think it is time to take this matter to Dispute resolution? Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 12:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Chinese grammar
Nothing too serious about this, but... You wrote 他是好 in Kingpin13's RfA. That is not very good grammar; in Chinese this means that Kingpin is something called 好, not Kingpin is good. Thanks for taking a look at this comment.  Kayau  Odyssey  HUCK FINN   to the lighthouse 13:23, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, i'm still a beginner at Chinese. I thought I said "he - is - good". What did I actually say, does 好 mean something else as well? Doc Quintana (talk) 16:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Nothing as far as nouns are concerned. :) But it's also got another meaning, which is 'liking'.  Kayau  Odyssey  HUCK FINN   to the lighthouse 08:29, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * In that case, should I have said 我好 Kingpin? Doc Quintana (talk) 04:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No, 好 is not used in this context. 喜歡 would be fine.  Kayau  Odyssey  HUCK FINN   to the lighthouse 04:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Section Break
Thanks for the hearty welcome. -Chris Chris874664 (talk) 03:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your RfA Support
User: - Thanks for your participation and support in my recent successful RfA. Your confidence and trust in me is much appreciated. As a new admin I will try hard to keep from wading in too deep over the tops of my waders, nor shall I let the Buffalo intimidate me.--Mike Cline (talk) 09:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

town meetings
Try starting an article on your user page until it is somewhat well written. Deletion is supposed to be based on the subject, not the quality of the writing, but the writing quality often does have some weight. Good luck. Look for references! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 02:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Let me know if you want any help, Doc. I don't know much about town hall meetings but I'm a pretty good proofreader and writer. And I can format references like... someone who is really good at formatting references. [[Image:718smiley.svg|20px]] - &lt;&gt;Multi‑Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 09:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: your reference desk question about tv-show with white people turning black.
I added this possible answer to the RD archives:


 * ADDENDUM to archived answers: you might be thinking of Soul Man (film), which has tanning pills in it's plot.

(Or try clicking on What links here on the Soul Man (film) page, if you think a tv-show ripped of the film plot.)

195.35.160.133 (talk) 10:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC) Martin.

Don't shoot yourself in the foot
Hi, the original essay here was deleted because of perjorative links to the footballer. It's probably not a good idea to add such links back in. Kevin (talk) 05:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Dispute Resolution
I posted a notice of “Impropriety and harassment help request” on the WP:ANI, as editor Fl (User talk:fl) had suggested and advised. I strictly complained about the harassment and impropriety of Flowanda. The case was closed without addressing the issue or resolving my complaint. It seems that Flowand has friends that can close complaints without properly and fairly addressing, reviewing or resolving them. Should I take this matter to Dispute Resolution? Would it be advisable and judicious to ask for a Dispute resolution request (WP:DRR)? Or does she have friends up there as well? Kindly please advice. Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 14:14, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
I have answered your question. I have been too busy the past couple of days to check up on my RfA. Osarius That's me! : Naggin' again? : What did I do?! 01:04, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll remove my oppose. Doc Quintana (talk) 10:50, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Referencing and Citing
Hi Doc. Here I am again, still! First of all, to thank you profusely for all your valuable help and continued support. You are a true mentor and defender of the Wiki. Second, to ask you about referencing and citing. I don’t understand or know the difference, if there is any. I don't understand the meaning of Template:Citation. I think I have been using a {reference} format or template to reference the articles. What is the difference between a citation and a reference? I have worked on at least 30 or 40 articles by now, trying to rehabilitate, restore and reference them (most of them were just plain old stubs). I have used at least 10 to 15 references per article. That is a total of about 600 entries. It would be a terrible thing if all this work has not been done correctly. Are they all wrong? Am I doing the referencing wrong? I really need your advice here, before I go any further. I honestly believed I have been referencing every article correctly. Please clarify this matter at your earliest convenience. Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 03:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Doc, please disregard my last postings and don’t worry about it. I think I have sort and figured it out. I just want to make sure I am doing the referencing correctly. Thanks anyway. With kindest regards, --Grancafé (talk) 16:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia
Hi Doc, I just noticed that the article on the National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia was modified on February 20, 2010, at 16:00 by an editor VickyMa, deleting all my contributions with total disregard and without any comment, justification or reason; in my opinion, with total contempt. What should I do here to have my contributions inserted back into the article? I don’t want to do so just on my own initiative in order to avoid any argument or confrontation. Should I ask for comment RFC? Or what do you suggest I do. Please advice. Thanks, --Grancafé (talk) 17:40, 27 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Doc, thank you so very much for your prompt, insightful and encouraging response. Mil gracias, --Grancafé (talk) 18:50, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Your changes to Boston Red Sox all-time roster
Doc, I have reverted your changes to Boston Red Sox all-time roster. While I admire your boldness, I have some major concerns. Let me know if you have any questions or need any more information.  caknuck °  needs to be running more often  05:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Changes of this magnitude should be discussed at either the article talk page or at the WikiProject Baseball talk page. I've gone ahead and started the discussion and I encourage you to participate.
 * 2) If there is some consensus to proceed as intended, you should do most of your work on a subpage in your userspace to minimize disruption of what will be a busy page in the next few weeks and months.
 * Not a problem, I apologize and i'll try to work it out on a subpage before I submit the revamp. I think it'll look much better with more information, but I was definitely in the wrong for abandoning it like that, especially in article space. Doc Quintana (talk) 14:57, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * What i'm looking to do is make a more indepth version of Philadelphia Athletics (1890–1891) all-time roster. That seems to be very close to being a featured list, and i'd like to see the Nation have a featured list as well. Doc Quintana (talk) 15:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No need to apologize. I started a thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball to discuss your ideas and coming up with some standards for the roster pages in general. I hope you contribute to the thread.  caknuck °  needs to be running more often  17:29, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Fantastic, will do. Thanks again for the heads up! Doc Quintana (talk) 17:31, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Helpme
I'm thinking of starting a new article, but i'm not sure if it'd survive deletion. Where should I go to ask if it would? The village pump?


 * Probably not the Village Pump, which "is used to discuss the technical issues, policies, and operations of Wikipedia". You can try making a draft and going to WP:Requests for feedback. Other than that, all i can suggest is reading over whatever guidelines/policies that apply WP:N, WP:V, etc.). In the end, I don't see why it hurts to try anyhow, though. Someone else may have more information!  fetch  comms  ☛ 00:17, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Is there a specific reason you think it will be deleted? If not, just go ahead and do it. Be bold! If you can back it up with verifiable sources (and it doesn't breach this) then it probably won't get deleted. Bear NPOV in mind too and what Wikipedia is not.
 * If you want, you can create it in a sandbox (e.g. User:Doc Quintana/sandbox) and I'll check it out for you before you move it to the main space. -- RA (talk) 00:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The idea I have is 2010 New Hampshire Town Meeting Season. There are only two places in the world that have direct democracy, Switzerland and New England at the municipal level. In New Hampshire law, town meetings are legally the legislative body, and in traditional town meeting towns (non-SB2), they're also town elections, so it'd be comparable to combining an article on a session of Congress and an election article in theory. I am very unsure that an article for each town would survive, but my guess is that it's a 50/50 chance it'd survive if I did a statewide overview of all 200+ towns since even most people in New Hampshire aren't fully aware of what town meeting actually is anymore (I live in an SB2 town and only about 2% of all registered voters attend the deliberative session each year).


 * I've started a test page the other day, it's at User:Doc Quintana/town meetings, but so far all I have is a list of the towns. Doc Quintana (talk) 15:23, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't know very much about the politics of New Hampshire, but you may get some inspiration looking at Category:Constituencies and Category:Elections, including Category:New Hampshire elections. -- RA (talk) 18:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I would say that it would probably survive if there were enough sources and you did a whole state overview. But I don't know much about New Hampshire politics either, sorry.  fetch  comms  ☛ 21:29, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, i'm actually an elected official at the town level in New Hampshire, have been for four years, and I am still learning things. Our laws are a bit complicated. Hopefully my article can help voters engaging in their duties though. I won't take the article live until I have at least four or five reliable sources as reference, as well as a separate page describing all the different variations in municipal government in New Hampshire. Doc Quintana (talk) 21:46, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

← Well, it's certainly an advantage knowing what to look for!  fetch  comms  ☛ 22:02, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Help on columns
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Doc Quintana (talk • contribs) 21:12, 13 March 2010


 * To the best of my knowledge, their is no actual technical limitation, beyond reason (9000 columns might be pushing it). Remember that not everyone has a wide screen; many people still browse at 640x480, others use Wikipedia on mobile devices, so try to keep things as accessible as possible.  Chzz  ►  22:04, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Wasn't thinking 9,000, but I was wondering if 42 would be past the limit of accessibility in your opinion. Doc Quintana (talk) 22:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * 42, the answer to life, the universe and everything!


 * ...and that's not too wide - so, if there is a compelling reason, yes; if each column were more than 1 character, though, I would advise against it. I don't know the purpose you have in mind; perhaps a picture might be better, unless it really helps to have it 'sortable' or somesuch. Feel free to ask me further.  Chzz  ►  22:50, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * By the way...it would be helpful if, in future, you could use down here, at the end of your talk page. It makes it easier to track conversations when things are 'in order'. Feel free to use helpme liberally, that's what we helpers are here for - but, please, at the END of the talk page, not the start. Many thanks,   Chzz  ►  22:55, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Gotcha, i'll put it at the bottom from now on. Also....Doc Quintana (talk) 23:06, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok Lemme Explain A Little More
What i'm trying to do is an article on 2010 town meetings in New Hampshire. Basically, under New Hampshire law, town meetings are a combination of Congress and Elections, only at the local level.

I think it'll pass muster if I combine all the towns, but there's the rub. There are 200 plus towns, and while all of them generally have three types of articles on their town meeting warrants (election of officers, yearly budgets, and everything else), each town is different depending on a myriad of legal and local political factors.

The 42 (I was wrong, it's actually 44) number comes from Exeter, that's the maximum i've found so far. The average is around 8 or 10, but i've seen towns with only two. here's what i'm talking about in the case of Exeter.

I decided to split up those three types of articles to break it down, but that still won't help with the Exeters out there. I could break up the "other" section even further into monetary and non-monetary. I could probably break down the 42 in Exeter's case because alot of them were amended out of existence, or maybe put the inconsequential ones into an "other" column or something like that. Doc Quintana (talk) 23:06, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Interesting.


 * I'm not clear on what info you want to present for each of the (e.g.) 44. Just the 'yes/no', or info on the article? Either way, I think it might not be encyclopaedic; I'm not sure - people might think it falls foul of WP:NOTDIR. It it's important and encyclopaedic, though, then yes - go for it. I'm not sure what the best layout would be; I'd have to see it/try it. Give me a shout if you want my opinion on an example.  Chzz  ►  21:16, 14 March 2010 (UTC)


 * This is what i've got so far, let me know what you think. I expect this section alone will take another 7 hours to finish. Doc Quintana (talk) 22:50, 14 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I do think, personally, that it falls foul of WP:NOT - "Excessive listing of statistics. Long and sprawling lists of statistics may be confusing to readers and reduce the readability and neatness of our articles. In addition, articles should contain sufficient explanatory text to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader.".


 * I don't have a detailed knowledge of the significance of the information, so I am not sure; perhaps you could ask on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics, and get some opinions - that seems quite an active group. I wouldn't want you to spend hours on something that was then removed.  Chzz  ►  22:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up on the politics project. Don't worry, even in a worst case scenario, New Hampshire Public Radio is doing something similiar to what i'm doing, and i'm gathering up the data in Excel prior to putting it on here (made a wiki-template), so I can help them with their information and help them make a better product next year. Also, that graph is just the beginning of that section, I was going to put a paragraph or two in front, but I could also put in another column to for "notes" on how each budget changed from the previous year or what it includes. Many towns have separate articles for major or potentially controversial capital expenditures. Doc Quintana (talk) 23:36, 14 March 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, fair enough - and, you're welcome. No problem with the multi-talkbacks; ask anything, any time. You might also find it convenient to get live help, with this. Best,  Chzz  ►  23:42, 14 March 2010 (UTC)