imported>Daniel Mietchen |
imported>Daniel Mietchen |
| Line 11: |
Line 11: |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| == speedy deletes and nick gardner ==
| |
|
| |
|
| Hi, Daniel,
| |
|
| |
| Apparently you and Nick are not in agreement with about 5 speedy delete requests. Please come to a meeting of the minds with him over this and let me know what to do. Thanks! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 17:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :This section heading alarms me. Please do not speedydelete Nick. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ::I did not speedy Nick — I simply moved [["Bad bank"/Definition]] to [[Bad bank/Definition]] and speedied the former (i.e. the one with quotes in the title, which does not fit with naming conventions). I explained this to him both on the talk page and in the speedy template and send him an email. I also explained to him how he can have quotes displayed around the page title without the page actually having them in the page title, and I think he will consent to the speedy once he is back. As for the other ones, they were transclusions, and I think I have kicked them off the speedy list now. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:20, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :::righto, the others are now gone. I'll wait on the Bad Bank till he signs off on it. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 19:40, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Higher education ==
| |
|
| |
| Hi, Daniel, yup, that looks fine. Even makes some sense. Thanks! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 22:20, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == What do think of [[Earth's atmosphere]]? ==
| |
|
| |
| Hi, Daniel. I noticed that you signed as a specialist supporter of [[Earth's atmosphere]]. Have you read the entire article? If so, I would be pleased to learn what you think of it. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 06:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :Hi Milt, I had read it before signing up but didn't have the time to edit or comment in detail. Will do so soon, hopefully. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 10:45, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Active/Inactive ==
| |
|
| |
| Daniel, ich habe den Code angeschaut und verstehe wohl das meiste. Allerdings:
| |
| #So wie ich ihn lese, hätte er beim zweiten Durchgang aus "Inactive * Editors" "Inactive Inactive * Editors" machen müssen.
| |
| #Wenn das nicht der Fall war, dann müßte meine Modifikation [[User:Peter Schmitt/Code]] eigentlich auch das Zurücksetzen schaffen (wenn auch nicht unbedingt auf die effizienteste Art).
| |
| #Allerdings weiß ich nicht, wie ich ihn laufen lassen kann (es gibt ja eine debug und eine interaktive Option).
| |
| #Übrigens: Er testet nur den ersten Teil der Bedingung - 3 Monate inaktiv, nicht die zweite (Anzahl Edits in einem Jahr).
| |
| Und der Beschluß überläßt das Aktivieren dem betroffenen Editor.
| |
| [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 09:51, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :(hab Deine Anmerkungen numeriert)
| |
| :Ad 1: nein - er durchsucht nur Seiten, die aktuell in CZ:Editors gelistet sind.
| |
| :Ad 2: Guck ich mir an.
| |
| :Ad 3: verstehe die Frage nicht - zum Testen debug, am besten immer mit -always.
| |
| :Ad 4: ja, das sollten wir korrigieren. Erster Fall ist schon aufgetreten (mit genau 500 Edits).
| |
| :--[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 10:45, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :: ad 1: Das habe ich übersehen.
| |
| :: ad 2: Dann bewirkt meine Modifikation gar nichts, weil die "inaktiven" gar nicht geprüft werden. (Und würde so auch nicht funktionieren.)
| |
| :: ad 3: Ich wollte einfach sagen, daß ich überhaupt nicht weiß, wie man ein Script laufen läßt (falls man dazu überhaupt die Rechte besitzt).
| |
| :: Vielleicht sollte man das Reaktivieren - wie von der Resolution vorgesehen - tatsächlich den Betroffenen selbst überlassen. Wer selbst das nicht macht, ist wohl nicht wirklich aktiv ...
| |
| :: [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 14:23, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :::Ad 3: Zu bots gibt's keine offizielle Polititk - prinzipiell kann hier jeder welche laufen lassen, auch wenn das sicherlich nicht wünschenswert ist.
| |
| :::Ad 4: [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User:Caesar_Schinas/pwb/cg_inactiveeditor.py&curid=100113443&diff=100554390&oldid=100552363 Solved].
| |
| :::--[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :::: Ist Dir aufgefallen: Die vier Editoren, die es jetzt "erwischt" hat, hätten schon beim allerersten Lauf gefunden werden müssen. [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 16:09, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :::::Ist mir aufgefallen, ja. Die waren aber nicht in [[:Category:CZ Editors]] gelistet. Davon gibt's noch einige. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :Despite being descended of Schultzes and Maurers, my German isn't too good. Are you updating the active/inactive editor designations? --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 16:31, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ::Yes, kind of. What we did is [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User:Caesar_Schinas/pwb/cg_inactiveeditor.py&curid=100113443&diff=100554390&oldid=100552363 update the script that does the active to inactive transition], and think about whether and how it could do the opposite too. We also noticed that some editors were not listed in [[:CZ:Editors]] but only in workgroup-specific editor categories. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 17:49, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Natural number/Related Articles ==
| |
|
| |
| Daniel, you and Howard have edited [[Natural number/Related Articles]].
| |
| Since our views on what should be included seem to differ
| |
| I would like to discuss what should and what should not be included to make the list useful.
| |
| See [[Talk:Natural_number#Related_Articles_-_What_to_include.3F|this]] section of the talk page.
| |
| [[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 14:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Numbered equations ==
| |
|
| |
| In regards to numbered equations, see my comments at: [[Talk:Sturm-Liouville theory]]. [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 19:32, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :Saw them, thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:35, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == 1911 Britannica templates ==
| |
| Daniel, are there any plans to use this template? I notice Caesar marked it as un unknown template. Currently only 3 articles use it. There was some discussion back on importing 1911 Britannica articles into the project but that didn't get very far. Wondering if some template can be designed for it? [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 03:31, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :Sorry, I have no idea about the current state of {{tl|1911}}, so please try the forum. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 06:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Re [[Orchid]] ==
| |
|
| |
| Daniel, I added another pollination method of orchids, today, probably against the rules. If it goes in, [[Orchid]] version number would need changing. Often, when articles come up for approval, they attract my attention for content addition. I guess I should wait for the draft. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 03:18, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :Thanks, Anthony. Improvements during the approval phase are certainly within the rules. Can you please also see whether you can help to address some of the concerns Peter raised on the talk page? Thank you. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 07:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Subpages ==
| |
|
| |
| I like the ''idea'' for subpages at the bottom. But perhaps we could remove a few of the links? And maybe invert it, so the tabs are on the bottom? Just a few thoughts, nothing really pressing... [[User:Drew R. Smith|Drew R. Smith]] 11:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :If you have time to work on that, please go ahead and create {{tl|subpage-bottom}} or so. Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:45, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| ::Ugh... I just don't know enough about {{tl|subpages}} to make it do what I want. After about an hour of experimenting I only succeeded in putting the disclaimer above the buttons. Even then, it looked more like a formatting error than anything intentional. I could possibly make something from scratch, but I don't think it would look quite as professional as the one we have on top. I'll take another stab at it tomorrow, when I'm not quite so tired... [[User:Drew R. Smith|Drew R. Smith]] 12:55, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :::No worries — I think it took Chris more than just one hour to get the whole thing going. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 13:57, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| ::::I have a basic layout at [[User:Drew R. Smith/Sandbox2|my sandbox]]. The links aren't functional yet, but they will be. Since different backgrounds are used depending on the status, I'm thinking we could actually have {{tl|subpages-bottom A}} and {{tl|subpages-bottom NA}}. Those would then be called by {{tl|subpages-bottom}} using the metadata. [[User:Drew R. Smith|Drew R. Smith]] 00:47, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| ::::P.S. I forgot to mention that this includes a demo for opinions, something that has been brought up in the forums on occasion. If we don't want to use it, it can be taken out pretty easily. [[User:Drew R. Smith|Drew R. Smith]] 00:51, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| ::::Ok, I have a working version being demoed at [[Test articleA]]. If you want to see how it handles approved articles simply change the metadata to a status 0. [[User:Drew R. Smith|Drew R. Smith]] 02:02, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :::::Thanks, Drew — that's certainly a good demo, though further tweaking will of course be required. I took a screenshot of both variants and uploaded them to the forum thread to stimulate the discussion. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:35, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Subpages for [[CZ:Wishlist]] ==
| |
|
| |
| Daniel, I want to create a page for the "Location & structuring of References/Bibliographies" problem that analyzes the problem in detail. Specifically, I want to summarize the points made on the forum thread, so the information is available in a concise space. However, it doesn't appear I can create subpages of this page. There is no Metadata tab on the talk page. Is there a way to do this? [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 15:59, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :Subpages in the [[CZ:Subpages|subpages]] sense are disabled except in the main namespace. But you can of course create subpages in the sense of them having a slash in their page name, and link to there from within the table. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:23, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| Thanks. [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 17:00, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == latest delete requests ==
| |
|
| |
| I've deleted a bunch of them but don't see any justifications or reasons given for deleting what seem to be fairly large articles/lists. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 21:04, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :None of the tagged ones is large or even contains anything other than the speedy template. However, the category listing may be confusing because of redirects whose talk pages have been tagged for deletion: [[Talk:List of rivers by length]] and [[Talk:Catalog of magnetic nuclei]]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 22:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| ::Watch out for pages listed under T — these will mostly be talk pages that have been tagged. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Number of definitions ==
| |
| Hi Daniel, just an update on statistics: [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Category:Article_with_Definition] we currently have 10387 definitions, which means only 2069 article to go. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 13:22, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :[[:Category:Need def]] gives the same information. Nice to see these numbers go down! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:17, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == [[Orchid]] version number ==
| |
|
| |
| Hi Daniel, double check [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template%3AOrchid%2FMetadata&diff=100573683&oldid=100547636 this] version number for me. It is no where near the date, so I'm thinking you want the last version. [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 15:26, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :I just updated it again but don't expect it to be the final version for this approval - others may still join in, albeit Supten could approve the piece on his own. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:40, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Thanks for Wikipedia Journal link ==
| |
|
| |
| I have created a talk page for the external organization wishlist item and put the link you supplied on it. [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 16:19, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :Thanks. Saw your comment there while trying to get mine through the spam filter. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 19:12, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Geology and Earth Sciences ==
| |
|
| |
| Thanks for the link to ''Earth Science'' on the ''Geology'' RA page. I was not aware that such an article existed. Now I'm wondering just what the relationship is between the articles, their respective areas of coverage, etc. Check the definitions:
| |
|
| |
| {{r|Geology}}
| |
| {{r|Earth science}}
| |
|
| |
| The two don't seem to be clearly distinguished in the defs.
| |
|
| |
| [[User:James F. Perry|James F. Perry]] 20:44, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :Hope that 's better now — in any case, [[Geology]] is just a subset of the [[Earth science]]s, concerned with the superficial layers and their change over time. My expertise in this field, however, is limited to those areas directly relevant to [[biological evolution]], i.e. [[palaeontology]] and [[palaeoanthropology]]. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 08:48, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == An puzzling tag in the text area of a new subgroup main page ==
| |
|
| |
| Hi Daniel,
| |
|
| |
| I have created a new Internet subgroup, using the procedure described on [[CZ:Subgroups]]. Milt pointed me to that page and after following its instructions I noticed that an undefined link shows on both the subgroup template and subgroup main page. This link is named "Internet tag". I asked Milt what it is and he said he didn't know and suggested I contact you. You can see what I mean by going to [[CZ:Internet Subgroup]]. Do you have any idea why this is showing up? One possibility is it results from the subgroup having no workgroup associations at the moment. Is that it? [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 23:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :The answer to the use of tag categories is at [[:Category:Biology tag]], but I do not know whether or how {{tl|Workgroup}} works with subgroups. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Citizendium charter drafting commitee nomination ==
| |
|
| |
| Hi Daniel,
| |
| You've been nominated by a fellow Citizendium member to be a candidate for election to the Citizendium charter drafting committee.
| |
|
| |
| If you haven't been following the discussion in the forums, we're getting ready to establish a charter for Citizendium that outlines the project's goals, ideals, and basic structure. To get the process moving, we put together a plan for electing a group of Citizens to compose a draft of the charter, which will then be submitted for community review. You can find more about the plan [[CZ:Charter_drafting_committee|here]].
| |
|
| |
| You've been nominated by another Citizen to be a candidate for election to that committee. The next step is up to you: you may either accept or decline the nomination by going [[CZ:Charter_drafting_committee/Nominations|here]] and following the instructions at the top of the page.
| |
|
| |
| If you have any questions, just let me know.
| |
| --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 15:15, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Active Editors link on Workgroup banners displays newcomers (with no contributions) as "Active" Editors ==
| |
|
| |
| Hi, Daniel. The link to Active editors on the banner of the Engineering Workgroup provides a list that includes newcomers [[User:Eric Barbour|Eric Barbour]] and [[User:Donald Paul Martin|Donald Paul Martin]]. Both of them joined CZ in August 2009. The "User Contributions" for both of them is completely empty of any contributions.
| |
|
| |
| Is there any way to prevent the list from including newcomers who have not yet contributed anything? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 00:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :Technically, it would be trivial (the script "knows" them) but this distinction is not covered by [[CZ:Editorial Council Resolution 0012]], and given the current tensions about bots, I would suggest to wait with this one until that is sorted out. In the meantime, you could add your proposal into the preliminary table at [[CZ Talk:Bot policy]] (just fill in "purpose" and a name suggestion), which we are going to work on in the following days. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 07:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Fünfte Folge oder Fünfter Folge? ==
| |
|
| |
| Hi Daniel, I forgot my German. Die Folge? Der Folge? (See Bethe in [[transition metal]]) --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 16:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :"Die" ist korrekt. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 16:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Helping to determine Citizen article rankings ==
| |
|
| |
| Daniel. I might be interested in helping out with this. First, however, I would like to understand what is required of me. [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 01:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :Thanks, Dan! I replied by email. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 01:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ==[[User:Ro Thorpe|My user page]]==
| |
| Hi, Daniel, I like your suggestion; however, as you can see, the {{pl|French words in English}} (to give an example) thing doesn't work every time. Any idea why? [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 16:41, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :The template doesn't work with subpages. I fixed all the rest of the formatting. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:13, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| OK, thanks! [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 21:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Asking for comments ==
| |
|
| |
| Daniel, I would appreciate any comments you may offer on a new article, [[Petroleum crude oil]], that I created yesterday. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 18:13, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :That's a bit beyond my scope, though I might add a bit to the "formation" section, as it relates to [[fossil]]s and [[fossil molecule]]s, with which I have some experience. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:16, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
| ::Just checked my library — I have several dozens of papers on [[kerogenesis]]. My favourite is
| |
| :::{{cite journal| author=Albrecht P, Ourisson G| title=Biogenic substances in sediments and fossils. | journal=Angew Chem Int Ed Engl | year= 1971 | volume= 10 | issue= 4 | pages= 209-25 | pmid=4996804
| |
| | url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks&id=4996804 | doi=10.1002/anie.197102091 }}
| |
| ::Will see how I can fit this in with my schedule — chemistry doesn't top my list...
| |
| ::--[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 20:31, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Eventology ==
| |
|
| |
| Hi Daniel, I asked Boris Tsirelson to have a look at eventology. As far as I can see Boris's speciality (probability theory) and eventology are somewhat related. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 11:02, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :Thanks! So far, I only acted on formal grounds. Should these be fixed in time, I will have a closer look at the content. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:34, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ==Asking for help with [[Thermodynamics]]==
| |
|
| |
| I think [[Thermodynamics]] was originally a port from WP, but not sure. It would be most useful if we could get it to the approval stage. Would you *please* review it and revise it as necessary? Does it need a section on non-equilibrium thermodynamics?
| |
|
| |
| Also, [[Thermodynamics]] has links to [[Laws of thermodynamics]] ... but when I go to [[Laws of Thermodynamics]], I find it to be an almost useless stub of an article. Is the much better "Laws of thermodynamics" section of [[Thermodynamics]] inclusive enough for me to ask for speedy deletion of the useless [[Laws of thermodynamics]] stub?
| |
|
| |
| Please respond on [[Talk:Thermodynamics]]. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 19:25, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :Daniel, I have re-ordered the various sections of [[Thermodynamics]] just as you suggested on the Talk page. I have also added 4 images to the article and I hope that they are appropriate. What do you think of them? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 01:57, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ::Just one more comment. The [[Thermodynamics]] article looks to me as if it were intended as an overall, top of the heirarchy article with many links to more detailed articles of each subject. That worked okay in Wikipedia where there are indeed many separate detailed articles on each subject ... but in CZ, we have only a few such articles that can linked to. For example, CZ has [[Laws of thermodynamics]], [[Chemical thermodynamics]], [[Internal energy]] written by Paul Wormer, [[Enthalpy]] and a section of [[Internal energy]] that covers the First law in detail. Paul is also currently working on an article about the Second law. That's about all we have currently in CZ. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 15:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ==Language variant==
| |
| Daniel, most people on the planet don't speak AE. If they speak English it's usually British International. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 09:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :I know but we don't have "BI" in our language variants yet. Anyway, my intention was just to formalize it. Feel free to make it official any way you see fit. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
| ::Daniel, shall I write up suggestions on your whiteboard and make amendments before pasting it onto the Charter page? [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 09:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :::I would reserve the whiteboard for special cases (e.g. to avoid edit conflicts) but otherwise draft on these pages as much as possible. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Possible bug?== | | ==Possible bug?== |
Where Daniel lives it is approximately: 04:14
Notes to self
here
Talk space
Archives
Possible bug?
Daniel, would you be able to take a look at this page here: [1]. I don't know if its my browser or not but the defintions don't appear to be sorting alphabetically. They are all grouped under '0'. Meg Ireland 02:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Except for three that lack the subpages template which adds the category (and probably also the 0 somehow, though I could not yet figure out how). And within the "0" subcategory, they do not follow the alphabet either, hmmm... Anyway, standardizing disambiguations is certainly something for the wishlist. --Daniel Mietchen 11:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
a new member
We have a new member (User:Karsten_Borgmann), who is apparently editor of a German wiki connected to Humboldt-University Berlin: http://www.docupedia.de/ I don't read German, but I'm wondering if it is a project we'd like to partner with in some capacity. Could you look the site over and see what it's about? Thanks much. --Joe Quick 20:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Will do. --Daniel Mietchen 20:25, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Why do my website's 4000 visitors per week include visitors only from the CZ forums and none from CZ wiki?
Daniel, I have had my own domain website for over 12 years now. It consistently gets about 4000 visitors a week, including about 150 per week from http://forum/citizendium.org ... but not a single one from http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/(any of the 100+ articles I've written) .
It makes me ask how many people actually read any of our articles? Is there any way to find that info? Milton Beychok 04:29, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- No idea. I just went there from your user page. Can you see that? --Daniel Mietchen 10:28, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, I will be able to see that, but it will be next Sunday. My log report is a weekly one received each Sunday. Does CZ have any such log reports that tell us how many visitors we've had? Milton Beychok 15:41, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Please look at this forum thread
Daniel, this thread might be worth bringing to the attention of the charter drafting committee. See here Milton Beychok 02:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
CZ:Buglist examples
Hi Daniel. I noticed you changed the Image references in CZ:Buglist example1 and example2 to mediawiki links. The reason I presented them as http links is when a user uses cz-bugs (which is an email list), the mediawiki link syntax doesn't work. Since these are examples of how to report a bug or enhancement request using email, I think we should leave them as http links. However, I am open to arguments against this if you have some. Dan Nessett 21:28, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- OK, fixed. --Daniel Mietchen 21:47, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
German
Daniel, I translated a small piece by Clausius from German into English, could you please check it? See entropy (thermodynamics). As you know neither language is my mother language. --Paul Wormer 13:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- I put my version directly on the image page but think the article may merit a shorter version. --Daniel Mietchen 18:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- Yes I had some doubts myself about the length of the inset. On the other hand, I have seen so many mistakes in the quotation and also because Clausius thought of the name Verwandlungsinhalt, that I thought it would be interesting to have it. Maybe just the translation is sufficient and a good compromise?--Paul Wormer 07:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- That would be a possibility but I am generally in favour of showing excerpts from original sources, and Verwandlungsinhalt is certainly instructive. So I pasted the whole translation in for the time being. Let's take another look at this after a while, or ask others, and decide then. --Daniel Mietchen 08:34, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
German
Daniel, do you agree with this translation:
M. Planck, Über irreversible Strahlungsvorgänge [On irreversible radiation events], Annalen der Physik, vol. 1, pp. 69–122 (1900)? --Paul Wormer 13:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
- I would go for "On irreversible radiation processes". --Daniel Mietchen 14:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
- You may link to the original source. Peter Schmitt 17:02, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
- I had a link to a scanned version in the Ann. d. Physik, but it was the wrong paper of Planck, so I changed it. Question: the two links give different spellings Über and Ueber, is there a historical difference?--Paul Wormer 17:09, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
- Both spellings were equally valid in his time, though now Über would prevail (at least as long as the umlaut is available to the typist). --Daniel Mietchen 00:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- In particular, "Ue" is sometimes used for the uppercase umlaut. In any case, I prefer using the spelling of the original source. Peter Schmitt 00:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Trials
I removed it for now. As to being back, I hope. Still very busy but I want to contribute here more. Chris Day 12:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Daniel, I note that you revised Fahrenheit and Rankine temperatures so as to move the section about conversions and comparisons to a catalog subpage of the Temperature article. I certainly agree that those two sections make a good subpage for the Temperature article. However, they were really some of the core content of the Fahrenheit and Rankine temperatures article and I think they should also remain in that article. After all, there is no harm in having that content in both places, is there? Accordingly, I am going to reinstate a copy of that content in the Fahrenheit and Rankine temperatures article. I hope that you have no objection to having it in both places.
Also, in a brief scan of the Temperature article, I saw no place where readers are told that information about conversions was available in the catalog subpage ... and many newcomers to CZ probably will not think to look at the catalog subpage. Perhaps, you should add a sentence somewhere in the Temperature article pointing to the conversions in the catalog subpage ... or perhaps it would even better to change the subpage from "Catalog" to "Temperature conversions". What do you think? Milton Beychok 22:14, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
- I was hoping for feedback on this, since I think it is core content but currently not very consistently organized. So thanks for being so quick! My preference would be to have a separate article for each unit (i.e. also separate F & R), to have the conversions all in one place, possibly even a separate article (I set up several redirects). A subpage ""Temperature conversion", i.e. with a non-standard name would not be allowed by current rules and also cause the subpages template to choke. Of course, there should then be links to it from everywhere relevant (I started with that for several of the articles but was not done yet when I saw your comment). --Daniel Mietchen 22:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Where Daniel lives it is approximately: 04:14
