User talk:Daniel Mietchen

=Notes to self= here

=Talk space=

AOTW References section
Hi Daniel. I see you added references sections to AOTW ant NDOTW - may I ask what the point is?

For one thing, references should be hidden in noinclude tags anyway, so they shouldn't show up there, and for another they don't mean much on that page; they're only really relevant on the article page itself.

Oh, and out of interest, where is ptcl going to be used, and what on earth does the name mean? :-p

Caesar Schinas 06:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Ad 1: Yes, hiding all references in noinclude tags may be the best solution (though doing this may be a pain in some articles) but I was not sure, and so I thought to give it a try with a reference section. I actually like it this way on the nominations page but do not know how to handle it for the Welcome page.


 * Ad 2: It stands for partial transclusion, and I have laid out a basic overview of possible usages at http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,2706.msg21413.html#msg21413. First tries on my user page and on CZ:Eduzendium (from where the references came in my formatting tests). Plan to play around with more of these possible usages and report step by step.


 * --Daniel Mietchen 10:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

ptcl in disambig pages
Wouldn't this make definition subpages obsolete?

I'm not sure that I do like it, actually, having seen your example - I think just definitions was better.

Caesar Schinas 15:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Let's keep one or two such examples for the moment and discuss the whole picture of possible uses together. I tend to think that this arrangement would provide an incentive to write lede sentences other than "A thing is ..." (examples in Music perception and Brain morphometry). --Daniel Mietchen 15:25, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I revised CZ:Article of the Week. Provided a place for anyone to simply make nominations. Then the program Administrators will do the transclusions.
I just revised the CZ:Article of the Week to provide a place (and instructions) for any CZ author or editor to simply add the names of new nominees.

I did NOT make any revisions to the transcluded versions of the articles that were added by you, Caesar Chinas or myself. All I did was provide a new section where anyone can simply add new nominees without having to transclude them.

I also reworded some section headers (and relocated one section) to make clear that Administrators of the "Article of the Week" initiative would do the transclusions.

I did that because I felt many authors and editors would be reluctant to make nominations if they had to do the transclusion themselves.

I asked Caesar Chinas to review my revision. After he does, I will also revise "CZ:New Draft of the Week" similarly. Regards, Milton Beychok 23:38, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks good so far, though now I will be hesitant to make the transclusions, as I'm not an admin (but perhaps that's a welcome side effect, right?). --Daniel Mietchen 08:35, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Anyone can be an AOTW and NDOTW administrator by simply adding their name to the volunteer list of administrators. Your help in making transclusions would be most welcome. Milton Beychok 15:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I know, that's why I wrote "hesitant", not "hindered". But I try to avoid subscribing to anything regular not in my top priorities (and these are all in real life). So call on me when you need help but otherwise, I'll stay away from it, OK? --Daniel Mietchen 18:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Article of the week
Hey Daniel, thanks for the note! That's great. I am sorry I have not been much active recently. I'm starting a new business and I am pretty busy these days. I'll be back in the future with more articles, meanwhile nevertheless I guess possibly there are some I wrote in he past to be proof read. (Are them all done yet?) take care. Dalton Holland Baptista 18:29, 14 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Nice to see you around here again, Dalton! No, proofreading of your articles is far from finished, but it advances nonetheless. Cheers, --Daniel Mietchen 07:10, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Template:Convert
Thank you for taking the time to correct the spelling on the document page for convert. I have fixed all other instances of this mispelling, throughout the rest of the template. I am glad to see that people are actually taking a look at this template. A lot of work went into designing it. The original idea was to simply import WP's conversion template. This turned out to be disastrous, as their template required thousands of other templates just to work properly. Caesar and I have come up with a much better format, that only needs one template. We also have convertrange, which, as the name implies, converts ranges of units, such as 10-12 feet into meters.

If you have any feedback about either of these templates, I welcome it. For instance, any conversions that aren't supported, but you think should be. Both templates are still growing, and need all the help they can get. Drew R. Smith 13:35, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Scientific method
What do you think about initiating the approval process for the article on the scientific method? It seems like it is well developed and ready to be approved. (I have left the same message for David Volk and Paul Wormer) --Joe (Approvals Manager) 17:51, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I would love to see this article approved but so far, it is a bit too philosophical for my taste and would need further input from a more "practical" angle, plus things like illustrations, references for the unreferenced blockquotes, or useful subpages (perhaps with a gallery). However, this is a topic I like to write about (currently here), and so I'll see how to fit it in. It would be great to make this a CZ:Big Collaboration but none of the previous attempts in this direction have been successful. Do you think we should give it another try? --Daniel Mietchen 19:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I see that Paul Wormer nominated the article. Maybe you could find a few minutes sometime in the next couple of weeks to make any adjustments you find necessary and then the two of you could approve it together.  (He has been a contributor to the article, so he'll need co-approvers anyway.)


 * I actually don't remember ever hearing about the Big Collaboration. It either escaped my attention or it wasn't publicized very well.  With two weeks before the article on the scientific method is currently due for approval, we might have time to give it a shot.  If not, I'd definitely like to give it a go for some other topics.


 * Thanks again. --Joe (Approvals Manager) 15:38, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Weekly change of NDOTW did not work.
Daniel, I just made the weekly change in the NDOTW and it went quite smoothly.

However, those changes you made in the AOTW on June 19th seem to have messed things up. The changes you made added in an extra step of some sort as per the blue font section just below ... and when I changed the article name to the new winner, it did NOT transfer the winning article to the CZ home page:



Daniel, I dislike being blunt, but I don't think you should make unilateral changes in the AOTW weekly change procedure without letting me and others know and understand what you are doing. If that occurs again, I will resign from my volunteer function of handling the transclusions and the weekly change. Then you or someone else can take over completely. Or, if you so desire, you can take over now ... just let me know. Milton Beychok 05:06, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Fixed. Caesar Schinas 06:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Bot to populate Related Articles subpages
I have now written a bot to do this. Example of the result are 10 Downing Street/Related Articles‎ and 101st Airborne Division/Related Articles. What do you think? I'll send you the code if you like. Caesar Schinas 07:44, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! One brief comment: I think it should also set up the current default sections for manual creation of the page (parent, sub, other). More feedback this evening. --Daniel Mietchen 07:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'd actually been thinking of changing it to do that.
 * The current code is at User:Caesar Schinas/pwb/cg_related.py.
 * Caesar Schinas 08:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * How about AAR-57/Related Articles ? Caesar Schinas 08:32, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, that's what I had in mind. I think it's ready to go then. --Daniel Mietchen 09:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Good. What we really need is to put it on the CZ server and run it every week/month with a cron job. Do you know who to ask / where to propose this? Caesar Schinas 09:48, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree that we are heading towards a cron job but before, we should give it some fine tuning (will get back to that). I don't know who exactly would be responsible but I guess we'd just have to ask those behind the bugs list. --Daniel Mietchen 13:35, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * So who's going to run it? Me? I don't mind doing so for now, but it will need to be run by a cron job in the end. Caesar Schinas 13:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll give it a try tonight. --Daniel Mietchen 14:53, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I've also now created the Inactive Editor bot, the code for which can be seen at User:Caesar Schinas/pwb/cg_inactiveeditor.py.
 * Two examples of the changes which it would make are and.
 * What do you think? Caesar Schinas 13:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The "inactive" categories need to be created, otherwise it looks fine. However, before applying it on a large scale, let's think about the antidote - those who came back and didn't change their category manually. I should be able to write that variant if the related pages stuff works out fine. --Daniel Mietchen 14:53, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

List of biology topics
Hi Daniel, I do have a move button on that article, so you want it moved to CZ:List of biology topics or CZ:List of biology topics A-M? D. Matt Innis 02:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The former, thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 09:45, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. D. Matt Innis 11:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Messy move
Sorry - so complicated... Ro Thorpe 13:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Never mind, and thanks for helping out anyway. --Daniel Mietchen 00:53, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Equal sign in caption
Daniel, I see you escaped the equal sign. I'm surprised that that's necessary, I would have sworn I used equal signs in captions before. And, how did you know that that was the problem? --Paul Wormer 16:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * PS I found a caption with a few equal signs: Angular_momentum_coupling --Paul Wormer 16:21, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Templates don't go well with "=" because it's an operator in there. The figure at Angular momentum coupling is not set in template syntax. --Daniel Mietchen 16:34, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I see, I thought that Caesar's bot replaced all  ...  by , but apparently not.  When he will replace all, more problems may pop up. Are these regexp operators that give problems? --Paul Wormer 16:57, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I also thought he did but have seen several cases where the old notation persists. Not sure how "=" and regexp relate in the context of MediaWiki templates. --Daniel Mietchen 06:28, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Response to your entry on my talk page
Hi Daniel. I left a response to your entry on my talk page. I explain there why it took me so long to respond. Cheers. Dan Nessett 15:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Hello Daniel, Thanks for your advices. I believe these will be very useful for me.

Regards. --Javier Abellán Sánchez 12:15, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, Daniel. Thanks again for your help. I did not know the proper functioning of the categories.

Greetings.

And also Thanks from me for your help and all the ideas! Celine Caquineau

Eduzendium
Quick question: Who should I contact to register a course in eduzendium? Thanks [Celine Caquineau|Celine Caquineau]]