User talk:SMcCandlish/Archive 31

=June 2009=

Outline of Knowledge: I need your mentorship
Hi,

Remember me? :)

I need help from an experienced Wikipedian, and I was very glad to find your name over at WP:ADOPT.

I need your advice concerning WP:WPOOK, which I've been coordinating. The set of pages the project concerns is listed at Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge and WikiProject Outline of knowledge, and has grown to about 500 articles in the encyclopedia.

The goals of the WikiProject are:


 * 1) Increase awareness of readers of the existence of the outlines on Wikipedia
 * 2) Complete the existing outlines
 * 3) Create an outline for every subject that is extensive enough to benefit from having an outline (core subjects and major or extensive fields).  There are thousands of these.
 * 4) Recruit as many editors to work on these as possible (we need thousands of editors working on these)
 * 5) Surpass portals in number by the end of the summer, and leave them in the dust by the end of the year
 * 6) Get the major outline subject areas displayed on the Main Page (in place of or in addition to the portal links at the top of the page)
 * 7) Increase the OOK to higher quality than Britannica's Outline of Knowledge (published in its Propaedia volume).

I'm very interested in your comments on how to achieve these goals.

Also I'm interested in every possible way of reaching readers and editors of Wikipedia. How can I get the most eyes and typing fingers on Wikipedia's outlines? Contacting editors directly without a reason relevant to them is spam, which I'd like to avoid. There are 75,000 regular editors on Wikipedia, and I want to contact all of them. But how do I do it?

Directly or indirectly, I don't care which, piecemeal or all-at-once, all methods are fine with me. But I've got to find ways. I need your advice.

I would also like to know how to find or attract editors to create new outlines. And I need advice on finding editors to help write the new outline article mentioned above (it needs to be fleshed out, completely referenced, and brought to featured article status).

Please recommend anyone you know who might be interested in sinking their teeth into a project like this. Or ways to reach groups of editors. Or ways to reach all editors. I welcome any and all recommendations and advice you might have.

And any thoughts on attaining the WikiProject goals above.

I look forward to your reply on my talk page.

The Transhumanist 03:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

It's on again
Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style

How are you? Haven't seen you around much. Tony  (talk)  17:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Fine, thanks. Was busy with finals, then off to Vegas for the VNEA Intl. Pool Championships. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 20:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi there!
Ping, I've emailed you about numerals. Tony  (talk)  13:56, 6 June 2009 (UTC) PS Pool???? I'd never imagined. Needs poise like archery and target shooting, I guess. Tony  (talk)  14:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Goth subculture
I've moved your request to rename Goth subculture to "Contested requests" on WP:RM. I think the term Goth is much more common in this context, but in any case I doubt it could be considered uncontroversial. There is a "controversial" tag on Talk:Goth subculture. A major change like this should really be discussed there first. Station1 (talk) 04:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

eh?
I'm not sure why you feel there are tone issues with this edit summary. Your nomination statement, on the other hand... –xenotalk 20:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm wikistalking you now? I think you need to take a break, perhaps. Might I also recommend Twinkle, which helps to automate the proper nomination, creation of subpages, and notification of creators for xFD discussion. –xenotalk  20:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * (Yet another edit conflict...) There are not only tone issues with it (specifically the assumption that I haven't read MfD procedure), but you should not have removed the template but fixed it, and you should further not be going around applying MfD notices to user talk pages with statements attached to them that I have failed to notify editors. I was in the process and you edit conflicted with me because you are clearly irritated that I've MfD'd a page you care about and you are busybodying and tripping me up. Just cool down and go do something else, please, and stop following me around from page to page and trying to make y yourself look superlatively responsible at my expense. It's not your job to post MfD notices, it is the job of the nominator. Twinkle: I do not use one of the supported browsers. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93;  ‹(-¿-)› 20:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't look to see if you were an experienced user when I typed that edit summary. The fact that the MFD subpage hadn't been created some time after the tag led me to believe that perhaps you were a confused newbie. I'm not irritated at all, but I admit I don't understand why you've nominated the page. On that note, if there's someone who needs to cool down, it's certainly not me. I do sympathize with anyone who can't use Firefox (I assume you can't - because otherwise why would you stick to an inferior browser and take 20-30 minutes to do something Firefox can do in seconds? Hopefully one day you can upgrade.) In any case, since you feel that I'm somehow out to get you or something, I'm going to withdraw from this page now. Best regards, –xenotalk 21:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; I must've misread your intentions and reactions. It just seemed weird to me for a party who was already defensive (in previous MfD) of the page in question to delete an MfD tag from it, then go to the talk page of the principal editor of the piece to notify him and state that I had failed to notify him. Regarding Firefox, I would love to use it, but for some reason it will not run on my system, and neither will Safari.  I will probably have to reinstall the OS and all OS upgrades from scratch, as these are not the only two problems happening. Not sure what's broken, but it's definitely broken. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93;  ‹(-¿-)› 21:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I did wait a few minutes to see if you wre going to create the MFD subpage and then I would've fixed the tag. Anyways, glad that we've got that sorted =) My sympathy is sincere! I don't know what I would do without Firefox. Best of luck sorting that. –xenotalk 21:23, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keen-o. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 21:56, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * How DARE you capitalize my "eh?" ??!! The uncapitalized "eh?" is a proud symbol of Can-eh?-dian heritage, and I demand you de-capitalize it at once! –xenotalk 03:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * &lt;Grovel&gt; —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 20:30, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * tHAT'S bETTER! ;> –xeno</b><sup style="color:black; font-family:verdana;">talk 20:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

RfC on Joseph Priestley lead image alignment
A RfC has been opened to discuss the issue of alignment of the lead image on the Joseph Priestley article. Because you have previously commented or been involved with this issue at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, your input is requested. Please stop by Talk:Joseph Priestley and leave any feedback you may have. Thank you. Madcoverboy (talk) 03:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)