User talk:Approval Manager: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Caesar Schinas |
John Leach (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "Cryptology" to "Cryptology") |
||
| (202 intermediate revisions by 24 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Please start a new section for each new topic. Resolved discussions will be moved to an archive. | Please start a new section for each new topic. Resolved discussions will be moved to an archive. | ||
{{archive box|auto=long}} | |||
== | == [[Randomized controlled trial]] == | ||
From my talk page: I dropped the ball! So glad you are here :) We need a date in the metadata and there is an issue on the talk page. [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User_talk%3ARobert_Badgett&action=historysubmit&diff=100780572&oldid=100779195 see Robert's talk page]]. | |||
:I certified approval of version dated 04:39 26 January 2012. This is a re-approval of a previously approved version. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 13:04, 20 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
==Priorities in Economics, Politics and History== | |||
I should be inclined to give first priorities to articles that serve as portals to others. At the basic level they would, of course, be [[Economics]], [[Politics]] and [[History]]. Equally important are some higher-level portals such as [[Financial system]], [[Great Recession]], [[Fiscal policy]] and [[Europe]]. If topicality is considered important, you might consider [[Eurozone crisis]] and [[Arab Spring]]. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 14:57, 16 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
:That certainly makes sense to me. I'll have a look myself, but do you think any of those top-level articles are ready or nearly ready for approval? The articles on current issues might be hard, since they will presumably continue to be updated as things unfold. Since approved articles preempt drafts as the first thing visitors see, such articles would need to be frequently re-approved. -- Joe Quick ([[User:Approval_Manager|Approval Manager]]) 15:10, 16 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Approval 'Applied Consciousness Sciences' article == | |||
Hi, I'd like to request for the approval of the 'Applied Consciousness Sciences' article. This way I know what needs to be corrected. --[[Carlo]] | |||
== Various computing articles == | |||
There are a number listed on the "ready for approval" page, at least one old enough to have been added by Howard. Most I cannot approve because they are my writing. For the Howard one, I've commented on the talk page. | |||
Two I'd particularly like to see move along are [[Block cipher]] and Cypherpunk. Both are mainly my writing, both were previously approved, but both have had a fair bit of change since. Cypherpunk is irritating; WP imported most of our article [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Citizendium_Porting#Articles] but both have changed since then and their current version is noticably better than our approved version. [[User:Sandy Harris|Sandy Harris]] 01:39, 21 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
:Sandy, I will look into that, and get back to you for thoughts you may have on how to facilitate moving the process along for specific articles. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 01:59, 21 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
You asked on my talk page which articles might be ready, and who could approve. [[Block cipher]] is one; Peter Schmitt was an approving editor for version 1. I think Pat Palmer is the only active computers editor other than me. | |||
That is a large article. It might be quick & simple to approve some shorter ones such [[Alice and Bob]], [[Rot 13]] or [[Caesar cipher]]. The most interesting short one is Cryptology. On Wikipedia, that is just a redirect to cryptography. Here. there was a lot of discussion, see the talk page. I think it is fine as it is. [[User:Sandy Harris|Sandy Harris]] 02:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Portal articles == | |||
May I draw your attention again to the portal articles [[Politics]] and [[Economics]] ? Both are well-developed with large numbers of wikilinks. You might also consider [[Europe]] on the same grounds. I should be willing to introduce any changes that are deemed necessary. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 10:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks, Nick, will do. | |||
: | :For each of those three articles, will you give me a list names of users that I can ask for comments on the article, including an Editor or two among the article's workgroup categories. | ||
:: | :Thanks. —[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 16:10, 17 April 2012 (UTC), Approval Manager | ||
:: | |||
::The only two names that come to mind are Roger Lohman and Russell Jones. As politics and history editor, Roger is well qualified to asssess both [[Politics]] and [[Europe]] - and Russell might be persuaded to add his comments. On the face of it [[Economics]] presents a difficulty because - as far as I know - I am the only available member of the economics workgroup. However, an assessment of [[Economics]] requires no knowledge of economics because it is no more than a portal. And, although Russell does not claim to be an economist, I note that it says in his talk page that economics was a component of his PhD thesis. So the two of them together might provide assessments of all three articles. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 09:19, 18 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 14:38, 18 March 2024
Please start a new section for each new topic. Resolved discussions will be moved to an archive.
Randomized controlled trial
From my talk page: I dropped the ball! So glad you are here :) We need a date in the metadata and there is an issue on the talk page. see Robert's talk page].
- I certified approval of version dated 04:39 26 January 2012. This is a re-approval of a previously approved version. Anthony.Sebastian 13:04, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Priorities in Economics, Politics and History
I should be inclined to give first priorities to articles that serve as portals to others. At the basic level they would, of course, be Economics, Politics and History. Equally important are some higher-level portals such as Financial system, Great Recession, Fiscal policy and Europe. If topicality is considered important, you might consider Eurozone crisis and Arab Spring. Nick Gardner 14:57, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
- That certainly makes sense to me. I'll have a look myself, but do you think any of those top-level articles are ready or nearly ready for approval? The articles on current issues might be hard, since they will presumably continue to be updated as things unfold. Since approved articles preempt drafts as the first thing visitors see, such articles would need to be frequently re-approved. -- Joe Quick (Approval Manager) 15:10, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Approval 'Applied Consciousness Sciences' article
Hi, I'd like to request for the approval of the 'Applied Consciousness Sciences' article. This way I know what needs to be corrected. --Carlo
Various computing articles
There are a number listed on the "ready for approval" page, at least one old enough to have been added by Howard. Most I cannot approve because they are my writing. For the Howard one, I've commented on the talk page.
Two I'd particularly like to see move along are Block cipher and Cypherpunk. Both are mainly my writing, both were previously approved, but both have had a fair bit of change since. Cypherpunk is irritating; WP imported most of our article [1] but both have changed since then and their current version is noticably better than our approved version. Sandy Harris 01:39, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Sandy, I will look into that, and get back to you for thoughts you may have on how to facilitate moving the process along for specific articles. Anthony.Sebastian 01:59, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
You asked on my talk page which articles might be ready, and who could approve. Block cipher is one; Peter Schmitt was an approving editor for version 1. I think Pat Palmer is the only active computers editor other than me.
That is a large article. It might be quick & simple to approve some shorter ones such Alice and Bob, Rot 13 or Caesar cipher. The most interesting short one is Cryptology. On Wikipedia, that is just a redirect to cryptography. Here. there was a lot of discussion, see the talk page. I think it is fine as it is. Sandy Harris 02:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Portal articles
May I draw your attention again to the portal articles Politics and Economics ? Both are well-developed with large numbers of wikilinks. You might also consider Europe on the same grounds. I should be willing to introduce any changes that are deemed necessary. Nick Gardner 10:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, Nick, will do.
- For each of those three articles, will you give me a list names of users that I can ask for comments on the article, including an Editor or two among the article's workgroup categories.
- Thanks. —Anthony.Sebastian 16:10, 17 April 2012 (UTC), Approval Manager
- The only two names that come to mind are Roger Lohman and Russell Jones. As politics and history editor, Roger is well qualified to asssess both Politics and Europe - and Russell might be persuaded to add his comments. On the face of it Economics presents a difficulty because - as far as I know - I am the only available member of the economics workgroup. However, an assessment of Economics requires no knowledge of economics because it is no more than a portal. And, although Russell does not claim to be an economist, I note that it says in his talk page that economics was a component of his PhD thesis. So the two of them together might provide assessments of all three articles. Nick Gardner 09:19, 18 April 2012 (UTC)