Wikinfo:Village pump/Archive 7

From Wikinfo

Contents 1 Images 2 Merry Christmas 3 Portal templates 4 Help 5 Happy New Year! 6 � 7 Writer's Corner 8 Database error 9 Chapstick lesbian 10 Import templates 11 Proposed 12 Possible Bug Report 13 Protection 14 SPOV in fiction. 15 Noticed something weird 16 Forks 17 Page suggestion 18 Wikia 19 Upgrading

Images

I've made some diggings and trials with images lately, seems you can redirect the name from an image to another if there wasn't any uploaded in the first. It's a little tricky, but it works. In stead of uploading one, you can just go to http://www.wikinfo.org/index.php/Image:Example.jpg and place the redirect there for your new image title, let's say [[Image:Example1.jpg]]. It also works on crossover extensions (for example from svg to png), so it might have a future for our SVG problem here. I've tested these myself with plenty of succes, I might say. I'm even curious to wonder why Wikipedia hasn't thought about this before (or I should count my Christmas blessings it didn't, cause we'd have another way for the censorship there to flaurish through media).

But all in all, I hope it'll be used for good and productive purposes, that's why I decided to share the information here. --Anime addict 03:34, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Hard to use as more than half of the svg images do work. I'm pretty sure our software is not handling svg images correctly, but have no clue as to how to fix it. Fred Talk 03:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas to all the members of Wikinfo and a Happy Hanukah to you Fred. I wish you all a good time this season and a Happy New Year. Wishing Wikinfo prosperity, influence and growth for 2009. Praying for her success.WHEELER 00:57, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Wheeler; although I'm not Jewish; Happy Holidays! is a nice sentiment. Fred Talk 01:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks from me too - to you too! --Anime addict 01:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, about that Fred. Duly noted. But Happy Holidays one and all.WHEELER 23:47, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps there should be a general policy of wishing people "due seasonal greetings" for all notable major religious festivities. Jackiespeel 17:50, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Portal templates

I'm pretty sure 99% of the Portal templates on Wikipedia do not and will never exist here. Suggest voiding, eventually making a custume one for Wikinfo with a link to it in the original... --Anime addict 20:57, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
That or redirecting them automatically to Wikipedia. --Anime addict 20:57, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I've never been sure about that. It is quite possible if we had more people editing that they would serve. Fred Talk 22:40, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Help

Can someone teach me how to format a disambiguation page? At this page Saturn (disambiguation) I wanted to place the second article under the same name but I don't know how to redirect to a different page of the same name. --AaronCarson 14:40, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I imported the page from Wikipedia (It has the car, too). I'm not sure what you wanted to do. Fred Talk 15:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

You might check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation Fred Talk 15:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll see if I can't import it at Wikinfo:Disambiguation. Fred Talk 15:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Oops, already did. Fred Talk 15:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Fred that helps. I've got a lot of reading to do!--AaronCarson 00:09, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I got to thinking about this subject, looking at word sense and word sense disambiguation and am considering what we might do to fully elaborate this aspect of classification, perhaps by making any simple word such as table a disambiguation page as a matter of course and any actual article expressing a particular word sense in the form table (furniture) or table (parliamentary procedure). Fred Talk 22:29, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Hy guys, sorry I wasn't too much around lately, Holiday spirit and such ;) Since it's almost New Year here in Romania, I'd like to wish all my fellow wikinfo editors (and anyone else lurking about :P) a Happy New Year and a greater one at that! --Anime addict 19:31, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

It's nice to have an opportunity to appreciate the fellow editors of Wikinfo, even if we are not necessarily from the same religion. Happy holidays to all. AaronCarson 22:10, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

�

It is possible to search for � Doing so exposes articles which have been corrupted: http://www.wikinfo.org/index.php/Special:Search?search=�&fulltext=Search Fred Talk 15:56, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Writer's Corner

Is it allowed for me to upload an illustration to go with my story? Something I created myself?AaronCarson 22:43, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Of course. Fred Talk 00:01, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Database error

If you go to http://www.wikinfo.org/index.php?namespace=8&hideminor=0&title=Special%3ARecentChanges , you get the following error:

A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:

(SQL query hidden)

from within function "SpecialRecentChanges::doMainQuery". MySQL returned error "1176: Key 'new_name_timestamp' doesn't exist in table 'recentchanges' (mysql.ibiblio.org)". Maximillion Pegasus 01:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, if you try any namespace besides (Main), you get the error. Maximillion Pegasus 01:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to upgrade soon. That might fix it. Fred Talk 02:43, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Chapstick lesbian

Seems rather derogatory and something we might not want around here. Advocating deletion per human cockfight precedent. --Anime addict 19:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, although there's a precedent for removing articles like this, there is something in Wikinfo:Policy under "Background" which I think is pertinent here. Of course Wikinfo is an ever evolving project, and is quite fluid in nature, so nothings written in stone. AaronCarson 01:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Amazingly, this term is in use in the lesbian community. It is a synonym for soft butch. Fred Talk 13:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Import templates

There are a several templates, Template:Wiki, Template:Wikia, and Template:Common which can be used at the bottom of imported pages and images. If the title of the article has been changed by importing it to a new title use this coding: {{Common|title on Wikimedia Commons}}. They are in Category:Import templates. Template:Wikifrom, a piece of my inept amateur coding has been deprecated and now redirects to Template:Wiki. I got this coding from Wikia where the original Template:Wikipedia was developed. Fred Talk 14:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I would like to create some templates this week especially for the creation of articles. Something like this article was written by (X) and proof readed by (X). Something along them lines. Could I have your help on this one? Gideon‑ X-

Such templates would only be acceptable for Wikinfo:Signed articles. Fred Talk 14:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikinfo is running slow isn't it? I wonder why it's running so slow? I know about signed articles and will give it some thought. Still, I think signing articles should be acceptable when it is protected to show its status. Thank you. Gideon‑ X-

Yes, definitely a long hitch in our getalong. I think those periods are related to overloads on ibiblio's database. Fred Talk 15:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed

Template:Proposed The proposed template doesn't work so I'll just come out with it. I believe wikinfo could be better if firstly,

• Administrators would create an additional set of rules about new articles on the same subject. I propose that no more that 100 words of one article can be used on another about the same subject to prevent mindless article creating 26 January 2009 (UTC) Gideon‑ X-
  • A change of viewpoint may involve change of only a few words. Simply using the words Red China one time changes the viewpoint of an article concerning the People's Republic of China. Fred Talk 15:22, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Good point. Then the words should be worked on until a neutral consensus is agreed. Creating a whole new article with everything exactly the same besides a few words doesn't make sense to me. 26 January 2009 (UTC) Gideon‑ X-
• Also, I believe that we should be able to sign articles without giving our details out. Established users should be able to sign articles with the four tides. I think this would improve wikinfo 26 January 2009 (UTC) Gideon‑ X-
  • Fine until someone else completely rewrites the article. Fred Talk 15:22, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Fred. I did ask that a page be protected (that is, the criticism of criticism of the AOY page I created) but I haven't had any feedback from that question yet. 26 January 2009 (UTC) Gideon‑ X-
• Also, looking over some criticisms pages, I think that administrators should do something about criticisms that cannot be verified. Thank you. 15:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC) Gideon‑ X-
  • I think there may be a libel problem, yes. Information that implies criminal or degenerate activity can be removed if there no substantial factual backing. No one needs to ask for a source. Just remove it. Fred Talk 15:18, 26
    • Hi Fred. I tried to, but you reverted this on the criticism article of the Assemblies of Yahweh. 15:26, 26 January 2009 (UTC) Gideon‑ X-
• Also, there needs to be coherency. That means someone shouldn't be able to create an article on criticisms and theories on (X) and then have another article called criticisms of (X) or have an article called (X) then another called (X) uncensored, then another called How to pronounce (X) then another called theories about (X) as you do with the Yahweh articles. I suggest the article must be named (X) and then in brackets should be the specific subject, unless it is a critical article i.e. (X) (uncensored), (X) (theories), (X) (pronounced) etc. Also, if they are more than three articles linking to a page, they should not be included in the hatnotes, but in a see also section. Thank you. 15:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC) Gideon‑ X-

I think your last suggestion would defeat the purpose of Wikinfo. There is a potential problem, though, of large numbers of articles on the same thing, if we don't do our best to amalgamate different points of view into the same articles as far as possible, as I mentioned to Fred above (twice). Even if we do, of course, it may not always be possible, if there are enough people insisting on different ones. Peter jackson 11:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Possible Bug Report

Sometimes when I haven't been on the Wiki for a while, I like to check what's been happening in recent changes over the last couple of days. To do this, I click the last five hundred changes button at the top of recent changes. Then I click the diff button next to the edit I want to patrol, and use the back button on my browser to get back to the recent changes list. This way it returns me to the last five hundred changes which I was perusing. It also helpfully scrolls down the list to the last place I was in recent changes. Unfortunately it doesn't stay there. Just as I'm about to click the next edit on the list, the page, for some unknown reason, feels the need to refresh itself, and as it does this it returns me to the top of the page, interrupting my work in the process. Has anyone else experienced this?AaronCarson 21:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

No, but we are due for a software update. Fred Talk 21:59, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I usually just open in another tab to prevent the removal of how I've configured the recent changes page, and not to forget to come back here often (lol). I don't know if you're accustumed to doing this, but you should try it. --Anime addict 22:08, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Of course, that's so simple, why didn't I thing of that?AaronCarson 01:57, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Just the habbit I guess. I probably wouldn't know what to do if any other tab except the recent changes wouldn't open either :-) --Anime addict 02:34, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks it's much better, I'm doing as you said and it also enables me to compare several edits at once so I can see where things have been moved and so forth. I can't believe I never thought of it. AaronCarson 02:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Protection

Hello admins. I would like this page protected please [1]. I have discussed for a period of about 24 hours now and my edits weren't appreciated on the first criticisms page so I'll need protection on this one. 15:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC) Gideon‑ X-

Delete as libel. --Dark Lord 16:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

SPOV in fiction.

Is it OK to slander a fictional character on the article of an episode? The character is made in such a way few positive things could be found about him, and a criticism page about the character would probably be just a stub and unvisited.

I'm talking about Cecil B. Pomeroy here. --Dark Lord 14:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

A positive point of view about such a work would emphasize its value as entertainment. The criticism article would explore the work's defects as entertainment. Fred Talk 16:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

It won't have any detrimental effect on the episode's value, maybe it'll even enhance it. Thank you for the explanation. --Dark Lord 16:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Noticed something weird

Hi Fred, I couldn't help see your archiving and while I hit the history page, a spike from 40kilo to 80kilo sprought up into my eyes, and I thought you may want to know about it. That and my curiosity... what happened there? --Anime addict 17:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Forks

I'm making some forks, some having at the end (2004) or similar. I wanted to ask here if it's ok, I haven't got any complaints yet, but I'm guessing some might be wondering why.
I'm doing it because views on one article or another have been changing since 2004 on Wikipedia (5 years since then already, right?), and yet I find some with the same lenght, but extremely different content from one another, and frankly it's too much of a bother to try to stick them together, especially if I'm interested in updating the article, and not necessarily the subject in itself. The old versions could be used as historic reference, easier way to join the content in a single article, or why not - good material for google indexing. --Anime addict 15:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
We could really use a Wikinfo:Fork here, if there is one I haven't found it yet. The equivalent article on Wikipedia is at w:Wikipedia:Content forking, but for the life of me I don't know how to adapt what's there to here, it's all written to discourage forking. --Anime addict 15:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Page suggestion

As well as the "Criticism of..." pages have a "Critique of..." equivalent - with particular viewpoint added (where appropriate) - thus covering all aspects rather than the merely negative. Jackiespeel 22:47, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Alternative articles can have any title. Template:Criticism is just Boilerplate. Fred Talk 01:25, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

More a suggestion/reminder that there are more ways to comment on a subject than merely criticising it. Jackiespeel 21:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Even actual criticism can be more than one thing:

1. saying the subject of the main article is a bad thing
2. saying the subject of the main article isn't a thing at all but an incoherent concept
3. saying some of the things in the article are wrong
4. ...?

Peter jackson 09:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

And then there are alternative views of a subject:

• Jesus according to the Catholic Church
• Jesus according to the Mormon Church
• Jesus according to whoever

Fred Talk 13:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The point I was making in part - and there tends to be an association of the terms "criticism" and "negative."

More the need to remind contributors that they can analyse a topic from many directions - positive, negative, and any other standpoint of their choosing. Jackiespeel 23:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

In cases such as the Jesus example cited above, is the policy to have the main article just disambig, or could it be an "objective" neutral article? Peter jackson 12:10, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

The main article Jesus should be sympathetic point of view, assume he lived and said and did the usual things he is credited with. It might credit the claim of virgin birth and resurrection, etc. There are a lot of thorny issues, but the main point is that it should be sympathetic without going overboard with respect to fantastic claims. It would be very hard to be objective and neutral. One ends up with a great many according to's. Personally I have a hard time with this as I am a Christian, but not superstitious. I don't credit the virgin birth or the resurrection, just the essence of Christ's message. Fred Talk 14:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

So basically you think the main article should follow the "mainstream" Christian view (Catholic, evangelical, Orthodox) as against your own liberal Christian one?

Yes, and no, but almost any assertion is controversial. The article should show Jesus in a good light. Fred Talk 14:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

More generally, your wording about fantastic claims would suggest that the statement I've put in the Buddhism article giving the general scholarly opinion that there are probably about 350 million Buddhists in the world is the correct approach, as against the claim of a Buddhist propaganda organization that there are about 1700 m (including a figure for the UK of nearly 5 times the census figure). Similarly, I assume it would be inappropriate to censor information about divisions within a religion, even though that might be considered unfavourable. It could presumably be toned down, or in some cases perhaps presented favourably as adaptability. Peter jackson 11:07, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Information should be accurate. Fred Talk 14:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the 'arguments and criticisms' sentence on the Main Page could be developed to include 'critiques' and 'commentaries from the viewpoint of (particular perspective) (as a reminder of the range of Wikinfo's activities). And headings such as Criticism of criticism of intelligent design possibly need avoiding. Jackiespeel 17:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Titles should be Defence/Defense of ... in such cases, where we don't want to clutter up the main article with detailed arguments &c. Peter jackson 11:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

A list somewhere of how (main article) can be developed - criticism, critique, defence, from the (x),(y), (z) viewpoint (and all of which can spawn their own subpages. Is "Criticism of criticism of a subject" necessarily a defence of the original topic? Jackiespeel 17:56, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikia

We'd really need a similar way to credit Wikia articles to Wikipedia, the template exists, but as it can be seen, they're mostly uncreated subtemplates that give red links. This is beyond me to import, but I think we'd need it. --Anime addict 14:56, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

The existing template puzzles me. It is not a link to Wikia articles but to Wikia wikis. I'll keep looking into it. Fred Talk 23:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it has to do with the Interwiki table, that's why I said it's beyond me. --Anime addict 19:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, perhaps I can puzzle it out. Fred Talk 21:54, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

On a parallel point, I imported the piquet article from Citizendium, but assumed it doesn't need acknowledgment as I wrote it in the first place. Peter jackson 11:09, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

You could make a Template:Citizen modeled on Template:Wiki. Fred Talk 14:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Upgrading

I'll begin upgrading the software tomorrow. This will result in some interruption of the site and of certain functions for a while, a hour, or day, or week or two. Hopefully most functions will be up and running in an hour or two. However expect at least an hour of down time. Fred Talk 14:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Trouble again with the character set, we now have random "�" errors and did not solve the blanking problem on long files, see United States. Fred Talk 17:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Rollback recovered it, that's a start I guess... At least you got rid of those nasty star figures in the templates. --Anime addict 16:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)