User talk:Adrignola/2011/01

You mistake hosting for planning a layout.
You thought that I was hosting, when I was just planning a layout, and it's not relevant under User:Wd930.


 * Hosting is very much still relevant in user space. If content in user space is not supporting work on Wikibooks, it doesn't belong here on Wikimedia servers. – Adrignola talk 15:04, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

If that's true, then can't I do that stuff in my sandbox, or the sandboxes (public)?

Thanks
Thanks for your recent help in formatting a contribution I have started to make. I still have a lot to learn about the process, grammar, and syntax. I appreciate you extra effort. I am interested also in learning about contributing images to the commons, because my field is very image-dependent. MJWhiteDerm (talk) 04:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * No problem. I try to "nurture" new contributors by leading by example and instructing on both the peculiarities of Wikibooks and the syntax of editing. – Adrignola talk 04:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Ongoing vandalism
Hi, could you please block ? He's been on a blanking spree, I can only revert him. You seem to be around judging by RC, so I thought I'd ask you. Thanks. Tempodivalse 04:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)


 * A feisty one. Blocked for two weeks.  – Adrignola talk 04:44, 6 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you! :-) Tempodivalse 04:44, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Nurture
I would of tagged it with essay myself, but I wanted someone else to decide if it really should be an essay, or proposed as something more. A version of IAR is 1/3 right. I was looking at IAR, BEANS, and PRUNE, they all seemed like pages about nurturing works and the project in a healthy way to me. --dark lama  21:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm sure many guidelines and policies originally started as essays. If one gains traction, it certainly could be proposed as something more.  WP:PRUNE and WP:BEANS don't seem to quite match up with the nurture page, though.  We don't really have all that many rules, so suggestions to ignore them would need some justification.  It should be interesting to see how the page develops.  Possible extensions to the page might incorporate Forking with regards to pruning on a larger scale.  Sometimes I do feel like a gardener.  More analogies: dead growth (inactive, poor-quality books) might be fertilized or removed, spread-out plants (shallow scope books) might be grafted together, weeds (vandalism) should be pulled. – Adrignola talk 05:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I aimed for a positive tone and to be consistent, which is why they don't quiet match up. Plus WP:BEANS is a bit recursive in being a not to rule that tells you not to write not to rules. I wanted to avoid that, and I think I achieved some success in that by briefly mentioning how cautioning against unwise actions may give them the idea to do it, and from there began to focus on nurturing instead. I wrote it like that because I saw potential for expanding into the many ways we could be more nurturing which is a positive approach compared to the many not to pages that WP has. I did give a brief justification as to when rules should be ignored, "when a rule prevents healthy growth and maturity". Feel free to expand the page with more analogies and more ways to be nurturing. --dark lama  12:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I added “Which means "Keep your nose clean"”. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wd930 (talk • contribs)


 * Neither beans nor noses are mentioned which unfortunately means keeping one's nose clean has no/is out of context. Also this essay isn't about keeping ones nose clean at all because gardening can get dirty which is the exact opposite of keeping your nose clean. --dark lama  23:32, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Adrignola
That doesn't make sense, so I was still doing it after you said something about hosting. I thought that it is just a fun thing.

Do you think that I should use a public sandbox, or mine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wd930 (talk • contribs)


 * It's hard for me to say for sure, as I look at all the subpages of your user page in determining what the intention is. I could certainly see how some of it could be related to work for textbooks.  You haven't made any edits at all to any textbooks to provide an idea of which though.  The username you are using is blocked indefinitely at Wikipedia as being a sockpuppet of the account WGroup, which had its content deleted as being unrelated to work there.  It is for these reasons that I am a bit wary.  Could clarify what your goals are, beyond a "fun thing"? – Adrignola talk 22:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyright issue on charts
I am not sure about the copyrights on the charts hence wanted your suggetions. I have been using charts published online by various sites like yahoo / icharts.in / indiabulls (using metastock online). I have them on my blog http://learnthetrick.blogspot.com can I use these charts for the wikibook Technical analysis.


 * Raw "factual" data can't be protected by copyright, except if the you are directly using charts that have any special and unique design. It is also proper to quote the original source of the data (or the value of the chart will be null). --Panic (talk) 15:41, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you that means I can create a chart from the published data and then use them in wikibooks. In fact I think to make the book genuinely worthy I will use chart made only from the factual data. Yndesai (talk) 16:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Links to my old username
Hi!

Could you edit this protected archive and fix my signatures as I did here? Thanks you very much! Helder 20:51, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes_check.svg Done. – Adrignola talk 22:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Bioinformatics text
I wasn't sure of the protocol. I wasn't happy with the text that I saw so I thought I'd start fresh. However, if the text has been abandoned I'd be happy to have me and my class appropriate it. Thanks, PaulWLepp (talk)

OK. We will definitely take this project on. You can remove the Intro Bioinfo. page. I have a some experience with these - the Ecology text was largely written by my classes. PaulWLepp (talk)

Say, can you also remove the flag at the top of the page? Thanks, PaulWLepp (talk)


 * Yes_check.svg Done. – Adrignola talk 17:33, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit Goal
According to Edits Per Day it would seem we've already likely surpassed the 2006 high in September 2009. --dark lama  05:14, 13 January 2011 (UTC)


 * One problem in comparing the two is that File:English Wikibooks Edits.png uses totals for the month while the other shows totals per day. If edits per day were at a sustained higher value in 2006, then we might not have passed the high.  Note the tight and tall collection of data points around July 2006 that contributed to that month's peak value.  Using that graph's average trend line, it would suggest peak average was in September 2007, however, and using its metrics, our average has not surpassed that since.  Averages have also dipped below fr.wikibooks and de.wikibooks a few times in the past, though the margin has widened since. – Adrignola talk 13:47, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Userbox merges?
I was thinking the educational, location, religion, and zodiac userboxes should be merged too like was done previously with the user language and programming language userboxes. They could become user education, user location, user religion, and user zodiac respectively. There may be other userbox templates with the same theme that might be worth merging as well, maybe like user group to replace the administrator/bureaucrat/checkuser/etc userbox templates. What do you think? --dark lama  22:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I like the idea for user groups and zodiac signs for sure. Those already use similar designs and would be good candidates. – Adrignola talk 22:42, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * One done. One to go. I think the others should use a consistent style too though. Being consistent arguably would make them more neutral and would give the appearance of not favoring one person's education, location or religion over another. I think userboxes can be seen as a way to share a single or class of information about a user. I think by having a unified style for information in the same class, people will also be able to more quickly find and focus on what information is important to them. I've also been tempted to replace "This user is..." with "I..." --dark lama  16:19, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, the others might not be hard to do as well. They'll probably have to employ switches, though.  The education ones for degree types will probably be no trouble.  Some of the religion ones are formatted to coordinate with the icons, so those might not look as good unified.  But, feel free.  I didn't import that many/all of the educationones so that will save the trouble bringing in the rest.  The religion ones are a pain because Wikipedia moved them to User:UBX/* or deleted them entirely (making some religions entirely unrepresented). – Adrignola discuss 16:43, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Updating templates
Thanks for updating tag. I'd gladly update other templates as well, but everything seems to be protected by default. The following templates should probable be updated from en.wiki as well: reflist, refbegin (fixes hanging indents!) and refend. Edokter (talk) 19:35, 14 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Those have now been updated, along with their documentation and the CSS in MediaWiki:Common.css/References.css. – Adrignola talk 20:06, 14 January 2011 (UTC)


 * One minor point; reflist should have class="reflist references" instead of class="reflist references-small" (or references-small should be added back to references.css; that class has been deprecated on en.wiki). Edokter (talk) 20:22, 14 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Whoops. Missed that section of the documentation.  The template itself now uses <tt>class="reflist references"</tt> too. – Adrignola talk 20:31, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Deleting redirect means broken links
Hi, I know you mean well in cleaning up the Programming: namespace. However, you must be aware that there are websites which link to content on WikiBooks, and some of these web sites were written before 2009. When I checked out a WikiBook linked from http://hype-free.blogspot.com/2007/08/postgresql-replace-into.html I found a disconcerting message: "This page has been deleted."

The log says: deleted "Programming:Converting MySQL to PostgreSQL" ‎ (Orphaned or broken redirect: content was: '#REDIRECT Converting MySQL to PostgreSQL' (and the only contributor was 'Adrignola'))

Converting MySQL to PostgreSQL is not orphaned/broken; rather, it is useful reference material. Please consider adding the redirect back so that people can find it! (Cool URIs Don't Change)

Thanks, Patrick Horn 67.188.214.127 (discuss) 22:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I know several books have been renamed with redirects suppressed. I haven't been the only one to delete on-wiki orphaned redirects.  Potentially a compromise would be to retain only redirects for book roots, but that would still yield grief if a link was to a subpage.  I like to think that the chain is not broken because I do not use clean deletion reasons and retain the former redirect's content in the notice that appears on the former location.  The linked document argues for proper naming of links in the first place so that they don't have to be changed.  I quote: "The message here is, however, that many, many things can change and your URIs can and should stay the same. They only can if you think about how you design them." Problem is, pages on Wikibooks can and do have to be changed.  Naming convention fixes in the past create a single redirect.  If none were deleted, whenever a new contributor comes along and renames any page of a book, we get a double redirect that has to be fixed by hand with no bots running at Wikibooks.  If not fixed, readers visiting the first location for the content get stopped just as with the notice noted above and just as similarly have to click the redirect to continue on.  Anyone else's thoughts on this?  Let me know so I can plan future actions accordingly. – Adrignola discuss 04:45, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that orphaned redirects should be deleted as they are detected, most of these deletion actions will have no other impact than to keep the project clean, having said that I must remark that this is probably not the most important task to do on the project, if anyone requests a restoration/fix it should be done, since this "pages" are clearly of marginal importance. The only reason I see as to require a deletion of a redirect is if the location is needed for a new book/page. Maintenance of redirects (fixing them) should be avoided, they should be just deleted but it should be up to the one acting on it, there need not be any consistency on the action.
 * Requests to restore redirects because of outside linkage, like the one above, should be encouraged to first fix the source and some notice should be added to the redirect talk page if found that there is a valid reason to fix/maintain it, so to avoid revisiting the issue again and again. It is clearly beneficial to the project that links from outside continue to work... --Panic (discuss • contribs) 06:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * <TPS>I agree with Adrignola and most of what Panic said, but I'm a bit sceptical about the part, 'they should be just deleted but it should be up to the one acting on it, there need not be any consistency on the action'. If there is no consistency on the action, one may argue that some redirects are 'treated unfairly'. Kayau 15:08, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * This is solved by documenting the need of the redirect on its talk page. I doubt that a deletion would occur if the admin was aware of the "special" situation, it would also clearly define that the redirect was intentional and state the party that has invested interest in its survival, permitting a dialog if the situation really needs a change. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 15:36, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

From Deletion policy: "Orphaned redirects that do not conform with Naming policy or where the names are unlikely to be inadvertently searched for by anyone." Programing: does not confirm with with our Naming policy. I think it is highly unlikely that most people would be surprised to find a link in a 3 year old archive is broken. Also if someone did search for "Converting MySQL to PostgreSQL" they would immediately find where it moved to. I think consistently and indiscriminately deleting redirects is what should be expected. However I admit when I've been deleting Programming: redirects I've been keeping the book/top-root redirect intact for now because of past discussions as to what extend redirects should be deleted or kept intact. Wiktionary uses a script to redirect people to the lowercase form of a definition when the capital form of a page does not exist. I have been thinking for some time now that we could do something similar for deleted redirects when a link to where the page has moved to is included in deletion reason. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  15:39, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Question from Special:Userrights page
Hi, I have a Question fro you again. I have created a bug https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26643 to gain some access to grant some rights like rollback. bug has fixed. i was asking 6 groups. it says they have added 6. but i only can see 3. What do you think? where is mistake? pls reply in here බිඟුවා (discuss • contribs) 02:30, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Nice. Opened Jan 9, closed Jan 17. Meanwhile bug 26344 opened Dec 15 is still open. Quite a few requests for LiquidThreads out there but I also see quite a few open requests. – Adrignola discuss 04:24, 17 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The bug is now closed. Thanks to whoever provided the encouragement, you good Samaritan, you.  We can see, for instance, on Category:Horticulture/Templates/Examples that links to parent categories are working (and the wiki has not crashed).  I have a feeling that we're the first to turn on subpages for categories given our naming scheme. – Adrignola discuss 04:49, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Template:Scrabble board
You want to take another look at the Scrabble board template? It's no longer working with Scrabble/Playing the X. --Jomegat (discuss • contribs) 18:19, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Should be fixed now. When Adrignola moved the other templates as subpages, he also updated the template using relative paths which means it was looking for "Scrabble/Playing the X/tile" and such. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  19:13, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the fix. We all have our days... – Adrignola discuss 21:08, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

remove IP block
Hi. I'm trying to get an IP block removed. I detailed the situation here: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Reading_room/Administrative_Assistance Basically, I'm a long time contributor to wikibooks, I thought it might be fun to play with TOR, set up a TOR relay server on my computer (without knowing the Wikipedia consequences), and now my home IP address (96.228.140.71) is blocked from editing. As soon as I realized the problem, I stopped the TOR relay and uninstalled the software. Tempodivalse said you could put an IP block exempt on my account. I'm gearing up to write another wikibook over the next few months (with the help of my students) and would really like access again from my home account. Can you help? --Rcragun (discuss • contribs) 19:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * (Breaking in, here.)
 * I was just reading this thread at the reading room, and I'm a bit puzzled. I don't see any record of a block on 96.228.140.71, neither  nor .  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 19:53, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Per an admin (Kingpin13) at Wikipedia, it's apparently the TorBlock extension that is flagging the IP and preventing me from editing pages. Here's the actual message I receive when I try to edit:
 * You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason: Your IP address, 96.228.140.71, has been automatically identified as a tor exit node. Editing through tor is blocked to prevent abuse. You can view and copy the source of this page:
 * So, not sure if there is anything that can be done about it, but that's what he/she says is the problem.--Rcragun (discuss • contribs) 20:18, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * If my understanding of MediaWiki's TorBlock is correct, and things haven't changed since I had the tools, then IPBE should fix this problem. A lot of people from China, the Middle East, etc., where WMF projects are sometimes blocked, have to use Tor, but can still edit via IPBE. (w:WP:IPBE: "It can also be used to allow editing via an anonymizing proxy such as Tor.") In the meantime, you could try to edit via a proxy service (a lot of web-based ones are free). Tempodivalse 20:30, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Rcragun, you now have IP block exemption applied to your account, which should allow you to edit. – Adrignola discuss 20:36, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hooray! It works!  Thank you!  Lesson learned.  I'll avoid tor in the future.--Rcragun (discuss • contribs) 20:44, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Bulk moving pages
Hi,

I'm really sorry to have to ask this but I haven't been able to find a quick solution. I maintain the A-level_Computing book and it currently has a focus on a particular exam board, AQA. Other people are keen on starting an OCR (another exam board) page so it would be good to turn A-level_Computing into a splash page linking to both books. moving all the current A-level_Computing/... pages to A-level_Computing/AQA/...

Is there an easy way to do this that maintains maintains the internal links?

Thanks Pluke (discuss • contribs) 13:05, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Please do not create splash pages. See Manual of Style.  I would advise following the lead of A-level Mathematics in using a deeper structure so that both AQA and OCR content belong to the same book and are linked from the main contents.  (As an admin) I can move all the pages currently in the book down one level at one time into an AQA structure and fix the links if that is desired. – Adrignola discuss 13:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Adrignola, That sounds perfect, if you could move all the current pages to /AQA that would be great, then I'll edit the main page in lines with the Mathematics page. Thanks Pluke (discuss • contribs) 18:09, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * All done! – Adrignola discuss 22:52, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this! Much appreciated Pluke (discuss • contribs) 11:09, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

External link deletion
I noticed you deleted a bunch of external link pages back in June with the edit summary "external link; no longer needed". I haven't been on wikibooks for a while and didn't notice until now. Was there a discussion around this? -- Prod (discuss • contribs) 23:17, 30 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, there was a discussion. – Adrignola discuss 05:04, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! -- Prod (discuss • contribs) 23:44, 31 January 2011 (UTC)