User talk:GregRobson

Category namespace tree/map
Hi Greg, I have just seen your work on the category namespace map. It looks very interesting. We are planning here to use Wikipedia categories as a taxonomy for a research project on information extraction and knowledge management. Will there be any chance in the near future to see uploaded FreeMind files with trees of arbitrary depth and/or the software code (i.e. released under GPL)? Thanks for feedback, as I said, this categorymap work looks terrific. Ciao.


 * Hi, I haven't worked on it since the last serious database changes were made, but I would be happy to give it a another whirl and release the code/instructions under the GPL. Give me a couple of weeks though as we're currently doing an office move at work and I'm a tad busy! Add User:GregRobson/categorymap to your watchlist, I'll add any details there. Greg Robson 10:27, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedians in Warwickshire
I've started a new category Wikpedians in Warwickshire, would you like to add yourself to it?. I'm feeling rather lonely at the moment :). G-Man  * 23:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You are lonely no more! I've also tweaked your entry, so there are now two under 'G'. Greg Robson 16:22, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Brum meetup
You noted on the Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Birmingham page that you'd have a look for a venue for the meetup - did you get a chance, and if so have you any reccomendations? Thryduulf 22:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I shall have a look first thing Saturday. Unfortunately I started back at work today, and have work again tomorrow! Greg Robson 22:15, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Cheers for your work on this. As its many months since most people probably looked at the list, you should post a message to the talk page of everyone on the possible and probable lists. I'd help but I haven't got time unfortunately. Thryduulf 23:34, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Category map
Saw your category map stuff, I was wondering if you had seen this on the toolserver. It's really cool stuff. the wub "?!"  RFR - a good idea? 18:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, that's certainly handy for double checking! Greg Robson 22:34, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikisource categories
Hello, Greg. My late father-in-law's grandparents were all born in Birmingham (in the broad sense), so we have a little in common apart from things that have wiki in their names.

Wanting to consider the use of Wikisource for Maori texts, I was looking around Wikisource and made a comment on a previously unused appropriate talk page. One of the big bosses very soon deleted that page and the project page. So I've asked him where we discuss categorisation, but I have a feeling he's not interested. You obviously are (and seem to be one of the few seriously "English-language" admins there). Where can I track down the latest discussions about the category structure(s) people want?

Robin Patterson 01:42, 5 May 2006 (UTC) http://wikisource.org/wiki/User:Robin_Patterson

Advice requested
I've been attempting to overview and tidy up the geography cats which involve the places where people live. From the top level down to local neighbourhoods. There has been some overlapping and various mis-routings. It's been interesting looking at it all. However, there appear to be two useful ways of doing it - by region, and by size. And these can operate side by side quite usefully. The by region isn't a problem. But the by size has become difficult because User:Hmains wishes to use the term settlements to cover all sizes of communities, and has altered dictionary definitions to fit his own understanding of the term - . Community appears to be the term used most often to describe the places where people live, regardless of size. This is the definition of community -. I did some sorting, placing the cat Human communities under Human geography. Human communities splitting into Urban geography and Rural geography. And those splitting into appropriate sized communities - cities, districts, neighbourhoods, villages, settlements, etc. Hmains has reverted much of my work, and insists on settlements being the term we should use - basing it on | this decision, which was a declined proposal to rename Settlements by region to Populated places by region. What do you think? Is settlement an acceptable term for covering human communities ranging from well established cities down to refuge camps. Is Human community a viable alternative? Are there other choices (apart from populated places of course!)? I have started a discussion here and here, with the above wording, but no response as yet. I have left this message on the talk pages of active Geography Project members. And then on this page. I am a bit lost as the best place to discuss this issue. I don't want to delete or rename any category. And I don't want to get into a revert war. I'd like an open debate to reach sensible consensus. I'm now leaving this message on the pages of WikiProject Category members. Can you advice? SilkTork 19:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion taking place at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements) SilkTork 11:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Electron shells FPC
Hi. I've nominated your electron shell diagrams for featured picture status. It's a peculiar sort of nom because it involves a "set" of images, although it has been done before. You may wish to vote or comment on the nomination. Also, do you think you can produce a vector version of Image:Periodic table of elements showing electron shells.png?--HereToHelp 16:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi! I've been fairly inactive on Wikipedia for some time, but happened to log in and was presently suprised by the nomination, thank you! I have swapped the PNG for an SVG (there might have been an issue why I couldn't manage it before, it was a long time ago!). Greg Robson 21:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the support of the nomination, the creation of the new SVG, and all the images in general. Keep 'em coming!--HereToHelp 23:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK
Hi,

At some point you expressed an interest in supporting Wikimedia UK. We're now ready to begin receiving applications from prospective members. If you would like to join, application forms and further information can be found at: http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/join. Feel free to ask me if you have any questions, either via my user page at the English Wikipedia or by email (andrew.walker@wikimedia.org.uk). Thanks, Andreww 14:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

(Membership officer, Wikimedia UK)

Request for comment on Category Redirect template
Because you are a member of WikiProject Categories, your input is invited on some proposed changes to the design of the Category redirect template. Please feel free to view the proposals and comment on the template talk page. --Russ (talk) 21:56, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Malvern College
Hi ! Malvern College, an article you have edited or contributed to, concerns an important school. It still needs some urgent  attention. If you can help, please see Talk:Malvern College  regarding  how it  may  be improved. ''(This is a generic message, if it  has been placed on your talk  page inadvertantly, please ignore it.)'--Kudpung (talk)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 19:00, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Suspension of admin privileges due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 21:32, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Notice of change
Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that you will not longer be able to request restoration of the tools because of your prior inactivity. You have until December 30, 2012 to request restoration or else the policy will prevent you from doing so in the future; you would need to seek a new WP:RFA. Until December 30, you can file a request at WP:BN for review by the crats. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

(delivered by mabdul 23:25, 3 December 2012 (UTC))

Just to let you know
You have been mentioned at Missing Wikipedians. XOttawahitech (talk) 16:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Poker companies has been nominated for discussion
Category:Poker companies, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 09:13, 23 June 2019 (UTC)