User talk:Xania/Archive 2

A Bit History of Internet/Chapter 7 : Cloud-computing
Dear Xania,

May I know why you delete all my pages for the above title at 22:53, 18 December 2011?

I know I have offended the copyright issue, but I already done the edit part which is not directly take from the http://www.thinkgrid.com/cloud-computing.aspx. I edit the pages so many times but end up still have the copyright issues. In addition,I had made some references stating that i have took some words from this web pages. Would'nt you just delete the part which I have offended the copyright part instead of all the part in that pages. This is my group assignments and I do not want to be the black sheep to ruin it. Tomorrow is my presentation for this assignment and I hope u will reply me urgently, Thanks,


 * Xania appears to be on his Xmas break, but you can request undeletion of deleted pages here. (Please log in to your account and click on "Add a new entry" in the "Undeletion" section.) Recent Runes (discuss • contribs) 15:49, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Xania, can you please explain why you've deleted the entire page of "A Bit History of Internet/Chapter 7 : Cloud-computing" by giving reason there was no response after few weeks but actually there was already response regarding the issue? Could you just delete the copyright violating section(s) but not the entire page? It seems to me what you are doing can discourage a new potential wiki contributor. Please restore the deleted page, thanks in advance.


 * The page has already been recreated. I don't understand what the problem is now.  See A_Bit_History_of_Internet/Chapter_7_:_Cloud-computing.  The section for this page on Requests_for_deletion explains that we can't see any trace of a response to the original problem and that is why the page was deleted.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 21:05, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Concurrent Engineering
Can you please approve the edits for Design Process in the Concurrent Engineering wikibook?

Also, we're trying to do major edits to the page for a graduate course and need more reign over doing this. Can you please open editing back up for our group? At the least, approve all edits by this Friday, Feb 27.

Thanks, Michael Koch (talk) 21:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Concurrent_Engineering http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Concurrent_Engineering/Design_Process

Sorry!
Sorry about the block, I thought it was a vandal blanking your talk page. I unblocked it now. Sorry again. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 00:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Policies
You write:


 * [[Image:Symbol delete vote.svg|15px]] Delete because I think the book should be deleted. Content is poor and likely of little interest to users. Votes for deletion should be based on your opinion of the book. Has Wikibooks really descended into the mess that Wikipedia has where everybody just quotes random policies instead of their views?--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 22:36, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"I think the book should be deleted" is not a reason, or it is the most generic reason there is, one that provides no basis for discussion and rational decision making. I for one am glad that Wikibooks has "descended into the mess". --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:10, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

DTFT table
Hey Xania,

the DTFT table is wrong indeed. The DTFT transfers into the periodic frequency domain. The signals shown in the table are not periodic, and hence they are obviously wrong. The table seems to list ordinary Fourier transforms for angular frequency, which coincidentally also uses the greek letter $$\omega$$, although with a different meaning. This confused the author who apparently copied the table from some book without understanding what he or she did. I will not revert the page again, but I hope that it is eighter removed, or corrected.

Regards, 85.179.126.108 (talk) 19:06, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikijunior
Hello Xania,

Thank you for the welcome message! Just from the start, I have two questions:
 * Are there any naming conventions for templates? If I make a template for Wikijunior, should it be in the Wikijunior namespace, and if I make a template for use only in a specific book (like Template:Small numbers/Table for Wikijunior:Small Numbers), should it have book title in its name?
 * I can't quite understand what is the current preferred method of adding new books to Wikijunior. On one hand, Wikijunior:New_Title_Policy says that the title with some description should be first submitted to Wikijunior:New Title Suggestions; but there's a big banner on that page saying "Currently, the process of voting for new books is not used." So, does it mean that I can add any book I want, but only to Wikijunior/Non-Canonical_Books?? I am somewhat lost...

Thanks in advance, Ashaio (talk) 11:44, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Template:Test
This template has to be substituted to work correctly, as do the majority of user talk page templates. -- Adrignola talk contribs 23:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Didn't think of that. Thanks.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 23:51, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Simple English Wikibooks
Hello. There seems to be a conflict of interest regarding the closure of Simple Wikibooks thats occuring right now. As we both know, the tally is at 45 yeas to 17 nos, the same as it was when the proposal for closure was finished. You voted after the discussion had been closed. I'm sorry but after the discussion is closed, no one else can vote. You are entitled to your opinions, but you cannot deliberately change the situation to satisfy what you want. You don't control Wikimedia and MediaWiki, only a community consensus can rule the outcome. You claimed that there was no consensus, however a 45-17 vote is a 72.5% support for closure, a firm consensus in most cases. I want to hear your side of your opinions so we can work this out. I always assume good faith in other users, but saying "allowing rabbits to vote for the slaughter of beetles" isn't very constructive or civil. I'm sorry if you're not happy with the results, but what was done is done. Regards, Slipknot1 (talk) 05:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

No consensus

 * The following discussion has been transfered from meta to a more appropriate talk page.

You closed the vote on Simple English Wikibooks. There is no consensus in this vote. The vote hasn't been publicised on other Simple English projects and opinions against the closure have been ignored yet no further reasoning has been asked from those voting in support of the proposal.--Xania 23:47, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The other Simple English projects have been notified when the proposal was started. See here,here,and here. Additionally many users who edit simple wikibooks are regulars in all the Simple english projects, and they are well aware of the proposal for closure. Some of the users who supported the project's closure are former or current admins/crats from simple wikibooks. If you are asking about consensus it seems pretty obvious. 45 users supported its closure, and 17 opposed. Mathematically that would be 72.5% in support. So the consensus would be leaning in favor for closing. Before I closed the discussion, two former admins of the project commented why the proposal has not been closed yet. I decided to make a bold move in good faith and did the honors for them. If you feel that you might want to discuss this with other users, you may voice your opinion in the comments section. Thanks, — § stay ( sic )! 01:10, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I voiced my opinion in the comments part of the vote page and then you reverted me stating 'discussion is closed'!!! Are you having a laugh? In your post above (4 lines above) you clearly say to discuss this in the comments section yet when I did this you revert me!!  I have now reverted it back again.  Oh and consensus includes considering all opinions and not just the percentages.  People supporting a deletion of a project with the comment that "it can always be restarted in the future" when this is clearly not possible because Simple language will no longer be approved is a serious flaw in that persons vote for the project's deletion.--Xania 02:16, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * First and foremost, that is not the comments section. That is the lead where the nominator explains his/her reasons for requesting closure. What you are looking for is down here. LOL. Also your comments sounded more like a biased speech directed to a developer demanding not to close the project rather than providing reasonable explanations to why it shouldn't be closed. However since you deeply insist that it remain there, I'll leave it. The discussion is over and pretty much people have or will start to forget about it. I have monitored and watched that discussion progress since Day 1 it was opened and read all the supports and opposes there were. There is no doubt that the project will never be reopened once closed, but I'm afraid it is too late to change that. Just because you don't agree with someone's vote doesn't mean it is invalid (unless voting after the discussion has been finished). All registered users are allowed to vote. — §  stay  ( sic ) ! 09:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Your neutral vote for my stewardship
Hello Xania, and thanks for not opposing me so far. I just want you to know, I do not try to come out as one being able to speak many languages. As you can see from my original statement, I only mention "no" as a fluent language, and that "no" is mutually intelligble with "da" and "sv". For some reason, they didn't want it to be written like that, so someone changed it later to "no, da, sv". --EivindJ (talk) 08:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I bringing it here since the thread is huge
I request that you careful examine what is on the table, preserving the status quo would be worst that any change, even if I agree that the new features aren't a game changer, the softening of the impact of FlaggedRev would be beneficial. My initial position is that FlaggedRev should be dropped but since support for that idea wouldn't be sufficient the proposed change would address the most obvious problems. In any case your stated position only holds a generalization not a specific reason for the objection. --Panic (talk) 00:17, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Since others have engaged you there on the same issue, please reply to them. We will not require a separated thread here... --Panic (talk) 00:48, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I would like to second that. Your vote and your reason for the vote are irreconcilably opposite. The proposal lessens the emphasis on FlaggedRevs and paves the way for their removal. We may find the proposed configuration useful for fighting vandalism if editors and admins become a team, otherwise it will just fall by the wayside. So please change either your vote or your reason as they make no sense together. Thanks, cheers. Arlen22 (talk) 01:44, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * How would you like it if the next time you voted in a general election that some annoying person came along insisting that you change your vote? Of course "it's not a vote", etc., etc..  I voted oppose because I wanted to.  I am sick and tired of long-winded discussions which go on forever and end up being discussed by fewer and fewer people because others just can't be bothered any longer.  This is not how Wikibooks or any Wiki is supposed to be run.  Why aren't you trying to engage the readers rather than satisfying the needs of long-term, frequent editors?  I voted NO because I don't want any more discussions, no more undemocratic policies and because I refuse to be pressurized by a small minority who seem to think that they're in charge.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 10:25, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I do think that things have changed. As for endless discussions there is nothing we can do about that, it is a requirement just to prevent an active minority decision, an attempt to compromise with fringe views must be made. Please do look at the proposal and provide us a reason for the objection that we can work on.
 * I started in objection to the proposal, moved to non-opposition and I now support the proposal as I see it as an improvement on the present state of affairs. --Panic (talk) 13:41, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I apologize if I offended you with my comments, I could have written it in a less demanding way. Cheers, Arlen22 (talk) 00:21, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello!
I think Greece's article has been completed 100%. What do you think? --109.242.72.101 (talk) 17:28, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Activity
Taking a look at activity levels, I notice that after January 11, you'll have only had two administrative actions performed in the past year (two deletions in August)—though you have plenty of edits. There is no hard and fast definition on activity, but I wanted to take the opportunity to see if you're still committed to serving Wikibooks as an administrator. – Adrignola talk 05:12, 3 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I am as committed as I have ever been although that doesn't say a lot really. I help out whenever I have time although I do try to visit at least once a day but usually via mobile phone or from work and so don't usually log in.  I hadn't ignored your comment on my talk page but I had forgotten to give you a prompt reply!--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 14:07, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Welcome Back
It's nice to see you in RC again. Welcome back :-) --Jomegat (discuss • contribs) 22:37, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikibook
I started Using YouTube Videos. Is it considered acceptable by Wikibooks standards? Joe Chill (discuss • contribs) 02:29, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Keeping Wikijunior:Numbers_from_1_to_20/0
I think you may have misread the book title, which does not include zero so your previous justification for keeping the page about zero would seem to lose most of its strength. Recent Runes (discuss • contribs) 18:18, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Block?
Hi Xania. You informed the wrong person of a block. I'm not blocked as you mentioned here; though Hunter Mariner is. Regards, Trijnstel (discuss • contribs) 23:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Your approval of unexplained deletions in European History
On 25th August Rgrudman deleted many sections of European History without giving any explanation. You checked or approved many of these edits, so does this mean that you understand why he deleted those sections? (see recent changes to European History) Recent Runes (discuss • contribs) 12:22, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Account Block
Hi Xania,

It looks to me like DarthMarius was the correct account to block rather than User:Kngothwrld. Would you review that please? The user page you deleted was created by "Darth". --Jomegat (discuss • contribs) 00:55, 16 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, you're right. Fixed.  I hope.  --ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 00:58, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks :-) --Jomegat (discuss • contribs) 01:35, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Muggles' Guide edit approvals
Hello, Xania. You may have seen me around, I'm one of the two main editors on the Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter.

Twice today I've found that you have approved edits in MG that should never have been approved. This edit answered a study question facetiously; we don't generally answer the study questions, which are left in order to foster thought in the readers, and this answer actually seems to suggest prejudice on the part of the book's characters. And this edit adds an ungrammatical question, totally unrelated to the page topic, and pointless to boot. You seem to have approved both of these edits. Is there a reason why? Chazz (talk) 22:40, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I approve edits which are obviously not vandalism and check them for general grammar consistency. I have no knowledge of Harry Potter whatsoever so any approved edits for that book are not in the context of that book and I'd expect those who contribute to the Muggles book to review edits more thoroughly.  The added questions of "What's so bad about a death eater in Harry Potter?" appeared to be grammatically correct on first sight especially as I have no idea what a death eater is.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 11:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Noted. I am not sure I agree with your policy of re-approving at the previous level, e.g. inserting a sentence with no capitalization (not "What's so bad about a death eater in Harry Potter?" but "whats so bad about a death eater in harry potter?") into a previously "good" article does not necessarily leave the article at "good," and it might be more appropriate to re-approve the article at the "minimal" level to assist other editors in tracking such changes. Chazz (talk) 16:49, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I DID approve the article at minimum level. I very rarely rate anything other than minimum because I don't have the time to go through articles in enough detail.  If a page was previously rated as 'good' and then rated as 'minimum' I'm not sure what affect that has.  Anyway, what is a death eater?--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 19:26, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It's curious, then, that when I looked at it, it was at Good level. In my experience, if you simply approve the edit, it comes in at the same level it was before, but you do have the option to demote it as you review it, and you can re-review it later, which results in, apparently, the earlier review being lost to history, both as to what it was and who so reviewed it.
 * Harry Potter is a well-written heroic fantasy piece with a good wizard (Harry) pitted against an evil wizard (Voldemort) who is trying to take over the British, and eventually worldwide, Wizard population. Death Eaters are the cadre of wizards that Voldemort has recruited to assist him. Their strategy for world domination apparently involves murdering those who oppose them and any innocents, including non-magic-users (Muggles) who are nearby. While it is, nominally, a children's book, there is certainly enough depth in it to make it worth reading as an adult, and enough to make it worth teaching in at least a few universities, as noted in the RfDs that have been survived. Chazz (talk) 20:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. I was aware of the use of Harry Potter texts in schools and universities but just curious about something known as the death eater.  Anyway, I hadn't noticed that the default for pages previously rated as 'good' was 'good'.  I'll have to keep my eye out for that in future.  I have rated some things as 'good' but very few (probably only 5% of what I rate) however it may be more than 5% if those that were previously 'good' are rated as 'good' by default when successive edits are made.  Can't understand why HP would ever have been nominated for RfD - even if someone felt it wasn't suitable for schools or universities wouldn't make it a candidate for deletion.
 * Apparently some people believed that the MG was copyvio; others believed it was not something that would be taught at university, because it was (shudder) popular. People have lost sight of the fact that Charles Dickens, in his day, was a popular writer, as was Shakespeare. And of course, some people felt that because it was a kid's book, it could not possibly have enough depth to make it worth study. At least, that's how I read the arguments in the two real RfD's to date. At least one additional RfD was posted by a vandal, with no supporting information, and was promptly eliminated by an admin.
 * One of the big things about Voldemort (fly from death) is his fear of dying, and so everything he involves himself with has to somehow try to ridicule that fear... like whistling in the dark to prove you're not afraid. The name Voldemort gives his supporters is part of that pattern. Chazz (talk) 21:12, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

WCI 2011 Proposal :Accelerating Wikibooks. Help Needed!
Hello!

I will be delivering a Talk at the Wikimedia Conference India 2011 on the topic of "Accelerating Wikibooks".

Over the next few days, I aim to make the proposal more and more wholesome and relevant. I'd like to discuss with you about the proposal and hope you can recommend me a few names on Wikibooks with whom I can discuss this.

I'd be very happy if you could discuss the proposal at User:Thewinster/Accelerating_Wikibooks

--Thewinster (discuss • contribs) 08:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Summary of the proposal
This is not a summary of the final talk, only a tentative guideline.


 * Create Roadmaps for a book
 * Define Learning Outcomes
 * Annotate and Discuss new content available from around the web.
 * Minor tweaks and fixes which concentrate on crowdsourcing.
 * Identifying Small Contribution that advance a book and designing good UIs and triggers according to B.J. Fogg's Behavior Change Model, 8 Step Design Process. The paper can be found here at Persuasive Design : Eight Step Process by B. J. Fogg

High School Earth Science/Water Erosion and Deposition
Why did you review the removal of a heading on this page? – Adrignola discuss 00:04, 20 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Because the paragraphs which follow didn't refer only to caves but to other things like sinkholes, etc. and this fit in more with the main heading further above (Groundwater erosion.....)--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 08:28, 20 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the explanation. It makes sense to me now. – Adrignola discuss 13:06, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

A-level Physics/Electrons, Waves and Photons/Electric current
Xania: you marked this as correct. I believe it is wrong and corrected it, but please feel free to revert me if you disagree.-- Arthur Vogel  20:14, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sure you are right. I was only really looking for vandalism and shouldn't have marked the edit as OK if i didn't know what it's all about.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 20:18, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

---

SOCIEDAD, FAMILIA Y EDUCACION
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/SOCIEDAD,_FAMILIA_Y_EDUCACION

OK, I began to write the book on the wrong place, Wikibooks instead of Wikilibros. But I can hardly believe that there exists any need at all of to delete it in a few hours, which even happen to be night hours in Spain. I could have been warned and allowed some time in order to move my text to the new site, instead of seeing it deleted after hours of work. I would say this is simply BUREAUCRATIC VANDALISM.


 * I have replied to this message on the user's talk page.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 00:36, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, Xania. I appreciate your quick response and your help. The editor who deleted the page must have been QuiteUnusual (I hope so!). I've been able to recover everything and create my new page. Best. --Enguita (discuss • contribs) 12:37, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Cookbook:Chicken Brown Rice Soup
Xania, I was actually looking for help. Thanks for your assistance! :) If you want to make any more changes, I would appreciate it. Thanks! --Mattwj2002 (discuss • contribs) 02:18, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Adventist Youth Honors Answer Book/Outreach/Christian Citizenship (Jamaica)
Hi Xania,

Does Jamaica have provinces (and by extension provencial flags)? That could have been a legitimate edit, but more explanation by the anon would have been better. I'll do a little research and see... --Jomegat (discuss • contribs) 13:31, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I cleared it up. In case you're wondering why there was a list of graphics there in the first place, it's a little complicated.  This honor has the same requirements for all countries, but each country has different answers.  I had set up a template a while back, which was intended to be "subst" in when starting an answer page for a new country.  It has all the requirements on it and a little formatting to suggest how the answers might be structured.  The thought that a country might not have states or provinces did not occur to me when I set up the subst template.  Oh well.  I imagine it also did not occur to the people who came up with the requirements in the first place either. --Jomegat (discuss • contribs) 13:51, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I also wasn't sure if it was a good edit or not. Jamaica has parishes not provinces but I can't find flags for the provinces.  More explanation by the IP editor would have helped.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 14:28, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Circular Cyclotron
Hi Xania, Circular is correct. Many thanks for spotting and reverting the square edit. marz (discuss • contribs) 21:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. Glad someone is watching the pages as I don't always get it right.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 22:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for the welcome! ;) Cirt (discuss • contribs) 16:12, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

A simple Thanks
Hi, I was just wondering if you were searching for a good book on, and were wanting to learn Hawaiian? Thanks for your concern on my book though. It's in no harm! :) Master tongue (discuss • contribs) 01:46, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for the review. Best, Cultures92 (discuss • contribs) 00:21, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry 'bout that
The last edit on Lucid_Dreaming/Using was a typo (the 'fi'). I had meant to just remove the newline separating the last list item from the rest of the list, but I made that typo as well. --Siddharth Patil (discuss • contribs) 02:08, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. --ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 10:07, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello Xania
I'am just going around asking people if they want to help with my books, I know most of you are very busy with other things so you don't have to help if you wish not to just asking. Thank you. --Fdena (discuss • contribs) 23:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Reverting by Xania
Xania, could you please revert everything that you changed back to the way I had it.


 * Responded to this message on the user's talkpage.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 20:21, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Follow Up on Italian/Lesson4
Okay, I was going on information that was not a reliable source, Sorry, but the rest of my edits were fine so I have redone them. Littleleeroy (discuss • contribs) 21:39, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Hello Xania, just wanted to say thank you for transwiking Canadian LGBT History for me.

I would like to ask your advice on an idea I've had recently. Would it be advisable to create a Project for wikibooks entitled "Winter Break Backlog Elimination Drive" or something of the sort? It could be in the same vein as Wikification Drives on wikipedia. Basically, over the break I've been hoping to tackle the backlogs on wikibooks, specifically the transwikis, splitting, and stubs. I recognize that I won't make significant progress alone and therefore I was hoping to enlist others to help. It might foster a sense of community, or it might fail spectacularly. What do you think? --Thereen (discuss • contribs) 22:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for approving our revisions! Cultures92 (discuss • contribs) 00:27, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * and, might I add, for the reviewer status Cultures92 (discuss • contribs) 23:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Could you review my article please?
Hey Xania I made an article on an Indian curry called Kadhi for cookbook: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cookbook:Kadhi. There are several categories I marked that don't exist and I don't know how to correct them. Also, I linked relevant items as internal links but they don't link to Wikipedia entries. So, will I have to external link each? Could you please help? thanks :) Noopur28 (discuss • contribs) 21:38, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

There's no room in a well established curriculum for "new media, it's already over-stretched/
Hey Xania, the page you just deleted appears to belong to Branding a University Media Department, though it was misnamed at creation. Seems to be a university student project with some promise. Except for their terribly long chapter titles. --Thereen (discuss • contribs) 20:55, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Just realised that now. Restored the deletion and moved it to the correct book.  The titles should be shortened but I'll leave that for the contributors of the book to decide.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 21:02, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Acidity of alcohols and water.
Dear Xania I add this topic to point out to you to have a check on your review of the edit http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Organic_Chemistry/Alcohols&oldid=2199272. That edit was on the article Organic Chemistry/Alcohols in section Organic_Chemistry/Alcohols which deleted Alcohols are weak acids, even weaker than water from the article saying water is not an acid. However it should be noted that the term acidity is based on the concentration of H+ ion dissociated in a particular amount of solutions. The term pKa is used for comparison.

You can refer to the 'pedia article Acidity.

The statement is very clear from NCERT chemistry text book for class XII 11.pdf

Alcohols are, however, weaker acids than water. This can be illustrated by the reaction of water with an alkoxide.

Thank You V ani s che nuTM 10:39, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I have responded to this message on the user's talk page.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 12:29, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kindness and sincerity. I feel proud to be in a community made of great people like you. Your comments were very encouraging. Thank you.V ani s che nuTM 14:07, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Reviewer
I'm putting this here because it is more private and Quintucket does not dissever to get dragged into the high visibility discussion about more generic issues. The issue of this particular attribution of the flag is not the main issue, the issue is why you and the user felt that the automation was not sufficient, as for the user he justified it on the aesthetic level, to me that simply is not a good enough reason, any Wikibookian with 8 days presence on the project can make a similar claim. I accepted even if I stated that I did not like and the reasons why, the special treatment you felt that this particular user should be granted, an exception to a normal and not particular hard process. To me the issue is closed since I will not propose a change to the automatic criteria, not the establishing of a guideline or policy for the attribution of the flag. I do however feel that the points I raised are important and would support anyone that would feel a need to get one of those things more clearly established, as I stated I have a high distaste about special treatments by arbitrary decisions, you have been in the project long enough to understand why and why they are problematic. They undermine future decisions... I have all faith in Quintucket performance and the call for respecting the automatic process has nothing to do with the Wikibookian. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 20:48, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If you look at my rights change log then you'll see that it wasn't special treatment. Many users have requested it and I have granted it.  You will see that I don't just grant all requests as I expect them to have quite a few constructive edits, not just 2 days of edits (you'll see that the guys whose requests I opposed on the RFA pages haven't really edited since) and that they're not just making silly edits trying to increase their edit count.  I have also promoted some users even if they haven't requested it.  I am waiting to see what others Admins think.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 21:50, 1 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I do not think anyone will get to take any positions on the subject since it is a done deal, and by itself it wouldn't even merit further discussion, unless by some unfortunate reason Quintucket abused the tool in some way. However this attribution of the flag, will establish a precedent for further requests of the tools and jeopardizes the rational in establishing the standing requirements, that is why I'm attempting to explain my point of view to you, when other intentionally or not remain silent. I have not been very actively involved in establishing the automation process itself, did participate in the vote for the activation of the review system (starting from a negative position to a non blocking), I preferred the previous system of reviewing edits and the log the showed pages that had not been paroled.
 * I hope that you consider the points I have expressed especially in directing any opposition you may have to the standing requirements to a proper discussion, if you feel like and not to bypass the process in a, if not discriminatory way as a unnecessary fashion since any Wikibookian that continuously participates in the project will get the flag automatically and by accepting minor reasons to bypass the process we incentive the feel of personal discrimination, or an arbitrary judgment of value, even if it is not intended, you can understand that any negative result may have by itself a negative impact on the person making the request.
 * One thing that I appreciate in your actions in the project is that you tend to think by yourself (and not necessary in line with the conventions and the supposedly majority view) and at times be able to take more controversial positions. In this case I'm only pointing to you that if a process is established only a good reason, enough to supersede the negative impacts would validate the creation of spot exceptions, that if those exceptions become common then the problem is in the process itself.  --Panic (discuss • contribs) 22:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for Welcome! --Cekli829 (discuss • contribs) 07:13, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Recreational Ice Figure Skating/Injury prevention and off-ice training
Hi Xania,

Please see the OTRS ticket in Talk:Recreational_Ice_Figure_Skating for the permission to reuse the contents of the Recreational Figure Skating FAQ.

Best wishes! --XanaG (discuss • contribs) 01:56, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you for replying quickly. I didn't think of checking the main talk page and just assumed, as per usual, that there was no permission for the use of the work.  Copyvio tag has now been removed.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 12:32, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Reject button
Maybe the reject button is failing because we both seem to be trying to use it at the same time? Or more likely, there is a problem with it. --Jomegat (discuss • contribs) 15:12, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure there's just a problem with it. At first I was just trying to reject some rather old changes (10 days old) so pretty sure I was the only one doing that at the time.  All I get is a blank page when I try to reject and after having checked the page history it's clear that no rejection took place.  I don't know how to report bugs.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 15:14, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know how to report them either, but maybe it's through https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/ Their "don't report bugs that have already been reported" schtick probably wards off more than just redundant reports. --Jomegat (discuss • contribs) 15:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm just raising the bug now. I'll post the link in the reading room QU TalkQu 15:23, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Holy cow! How would I know what module this bug is in?  I'm not even sure if it's in the MediaWiki software or if it's in an extension.  And that's a required field!  They must not want a lot of bug reports, because they sure do make it hard to report them! --Jomegat (discuss • contribs) 15:30, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * What you need is your own MediaWiki playground. It's the only way I can work anything out. In this case FlaggedRevs is an extension, so it's probably in there that we'll find the problem. But it might be in the specific WB configuration of course! QU TalkQu 15:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Deletions
I replied on my talk page. Magister Mathematicae (discuss • contribs) 15:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Please be more attentive on your reviews
I'm specifically referring to The Maryland Entrepreneur's Guide/Terms of Use/Disclaimer that you reviewed. The text included wording that imposed licensing considerations beyond what our copyright policy dictates making the work incompatible to our project. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 06:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * My reviews are to identify and remove vandalism or spam. I am not reviewing the content of the edits unless it is an area that I am very familiar with.  This is also why most of my reviews are rated as minimal.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 09:33, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Doing so puts them outside of the other reviewers line of sight, and it seems to be a generally poor tactic. Review what you understand and if you do have doubts or miss the time do not review, someone else will that has the time to do a proper analysis. I myself at times will not review mathematical formulas or source code not because I do not have the knowledge but I do not have the time to do a proper job at it (even in works I am extremely active), the reverse is also true I do not review material that I'm incapable of judging, there are a very few instances that I do it like you, but on simple edits not on large changes like in that page.
 * Since this is not the first time I call your attention to this (if IIRC someone else also reported in on this), please consider altering a bit your review practice. Reviews are important but they are mostly useful as a quality data point. I agree that it is sad that because of this system we lost the old method and log that was mostly dedicated to vandalism, I have expressed this many times, but we should make an effort to work with what we have and listen to ways that simple changes in practices can make a noticeable difference. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 10:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

The user talk page
So what do I do with my talk page that you created?

Creator edited the Wiki Book
Thank for notice my wiki book had grammar mistake. I had already edited and add some innovations to improve wiki book title. Not mind to go back and check again. If still have error I will improve or correct again.


 * I received your message and read your replied on my discussion page. Thanks for your replied and that's really great got your help. (K.b.cheng (discuss • contribs) 23:19, 7 November 2012 (UTC))


 * Xania, please check my wiki book, currently pending review . Thank you! K.b.cheng (discuss • contribs) 15:54, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Template:Wikijunior Article of the Month
Do you think it would it make sense to code rotating lists into the template, so they would change once a month automatically, requiring manual intervention only to change the lists? --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 15:31, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * It would make more sense but may be more effort than its worth. But then again it is effort changing it manually too.  Not sure how many people see the notice or make edits after seeing it (the few pages I removed from the notice hadn't had any edits for quite some time).  --ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 16:40, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm not sure anyone responds to it... and yet, it does occur to me that it might provoke more response if people noticed it wasn't static. Hm.  I'll give the technical side some thought; we wouldn't want to make it harder to do the manual part of the update.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 21:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Parallel Spectral Numerical Methods
Thanks for your corrections on Parallel Spectral Numerical Methods. Have finished entering most of the material. Any further corrections/additions/suggestions are welcome Benson Muite (discuss • contribs) 11:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Xania actually does mean something...
Xania is a typical transliteration of the name of a beautiful little town on Crete:

And according to the Greek Wiktionary it means hostels or inns (plural form).

Just thought you might be interested... ;) Zeptomoon (discuss • contribs) 13:51, 7 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Never knew that! --ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 15:30, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Xania - Do it yourself Home Staging Link
Xania, I added a link to do it yourself home staging, as I thought that it would provide people insight into the types of furniture and accessories that could be utilized in the act.

They are not selling anything on the website.

http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Do-It-Yourself/Home_staging&stable=0


 * I have replied to this message on the user page of User_talk:71.204.9.11

thanks and references
hi, thanks for the greeting :) i was wondering if you have a good example how to cite references in wikibooks? --ThurnerRupert (discuss • contribs) 14:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

THANKS
I have NO IDEA where on a "talk page" a "message" should go, so I'm trying it with the "Add Topic" link... wanted to say thanks to ЗAНИA for adding the template to me Esper page, which had a link on it to the Discussion page http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Talk:Esper which I had WANTED TO CREATE but didn't know how to. For some reason, somebody has also restricted me as if I was an out of control baby or something rather than TALKING TO ME or HELPING ME as I learn how WikiBooks works. Seems the idea of a newbie working hard at something in here is frowned upon and harshly discouraged. Donald Arthur Kronos, Ph.D. -- Actor, Activist -- One of many working hard to make the world better for everyone! (discuss • contribs) 00:50, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I have replied to this message on the user's talk page. --ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 12:17, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

LRMI/metadata
Hi Xania -

If you have the time, could you look over my proposal to implement metadata on Wikibooks and drop your thoughts on it? (Dropping you a note since you're a currenty active admin :) if you have time, it would be greatly appreciated. If you don't, no worries.)

Thanks, Maximilian.Klein.LRMI (discuss • contribs) 19:00, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry for the unnecessary complexity of my initial post. I know it's unorthodox, but I went ahead and collapsed my original post and inserted a much simpler explanation of what I am proposing above it. I think it was the best thing to do in the interests of clarity, but lease let me know if you see a problem with me doing so. I also answered a couple of the questions that you posed in the thread.  Please pop by when you get the chance and look at the simplified version of the proposal :) Maximilian.Klein.LRMI (discuss • contribs) 01:31, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Passover Hagaddah
Why exactly did you delete what I wrote?


 * I have replied to this user's message on his/her talk page. --ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 20:15, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikijunior geography books
Hello, I notice that you are a major contributor to the Wikijunior geography books such as Wikijunior:Europe, Wikijunior:Africa, etc. I feel that books of this form could benefit from a unifying page, a page that would serve as a title page for the books and would include links to each of them. It could even have a labelled maps of the continents with links such as I have done on Wikijunior:Countries A-Z. This page could possibly be titled Wikijunior:Geography, though I realize that these books also include culture and things that are not exclusively geographical, so possibly another name would be in order. What is your opinion on this? - Liam987  13:51, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

False Check?
I think that edit that you checked was wrong. http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=C_Sharp_Programming/Print_version&oldid=2212011 --Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 16:13, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your message. Not sure which edit you are refering to - the link above only shows recent edits by yourself which aren't checked by other editors because you are classed as a reviewer.  Maybe it was another page in that book - quite possible as I do make mistakes from time to time.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 19:18, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

If you look at the history there was an IP edit with +229,330 this seems problematic to me, I undid it by hand.--Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 21:22, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This edit was made in 2011 and I never saw any problems with it although looking in more details parts of it contained nonsense at the end. Since then 3 non-bot users have edited the page and also not removed this information.  Anyway, at least the problematic edit has finally been removed.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 21:30, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Here you see the same kind of problem http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cognitive_Psychology_and_Cognitive_Neuroscience/Present_and_Future_of_Research I think this is sophisticated form of vandalism and we might have to search for it, at other places. --Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 21:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I see the edit with the large addition of text but I'm not really sure what I'm looking for. It all seems OK to me with the exception of one line near the middle where a link is mis-formed.  What was wrong with these edits?  At least (for me) it was QuiteUnusual who approved that change rather than me.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 22:07, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Its esstially a cut and paste copy of the html of http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cognitive_Psychology_and_Cognitive_Neuroscience/Memory And that is a big problem.--Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 22:11, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Or simply look here http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/213.185.231.4 --Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 22:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I see. I'm proposing some kind of edit filter at the moment. Edit filter/Requested. Not sure what can be done. Text is frequently copied from Wikipedia - sometimes credited correctly and often not. It would be very difficult for each edit to be checked to such an extent.--ЗAНИA talk 22:17, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

an other example http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/116.75.0.225


 * We'll have to keep our eyes out for this in future. There seems to be no pattern in the origins of these users: Sweden, India...--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 22:50, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi
Hi Xania,

Thank you for the welcome on my talk page. I'm editing the Telugu Alphabet in the Asian language Telugu. I want more details on creating a table or any other formatting(superficial decoration/ornamentation) so as to look good at first glance and also help subsequent visitors in learning the language. --Varshasree (talk)

Hello
Thank you for checking my edit on Applied mathematics :) I am a beginner here, so I am glad that an experienced&intelligent person like you help me for editing. ShuBraque (discuss • contribs) 19:38, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 19:49, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Physics course, Physics Course and other books
About a year ago, and on and off before that, we had a mass copy / paste vandalism in these books as well as a number of others in the electronics field. I put these up for RfD and the RfD was supported along with agreement that the author should be blocked if they continued to engage in the copy / paste activity. Despite numerous attempts to engage them via email and talk pages (they use two fixed IPs and three accounts) all communication was ignored. This resulted in repeated blocks, each longer than before. At the end of each block they would come back and start the copyvios again. All we were asking for was confirmation of the source so we could verify the copyright status - but every time we were ignored. Anyway, the last year long block expired last month and the vandal is back. I removed all the additions they made to Physics Course which had the same characteristics as before - clearly copy / paste with no attribution, blocked the IP again and protected the book to stop IPs editing. Their next action was to create Physics course from another IP to get round the block and the protection. It is again full of copy / paste material. I've nuked it, and protected it. Why am I telling you? To explain my actions as I see you have also tried to get the IP editor to engage in a conversation via their talk page QU TalkQu 21:31, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You probably remember it all as you were involved in the discussion Requests for deletion/Multiple Books Created from Wikipedia Without Attribution. Like I said then, and now, I don't want the books deleted, but the continual recreation of this material is a monumental pain to deal with QU TalkQu 21:36, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for informing me about this. I had also reviewed some of these edits but hadn-t spotted anything suspicious because I was either no aware or had forgotten about the issue last year.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 21:45, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Could you please help to check the page Allies_vs._Axis again
Could you please help to check the page http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Allies_vs._Axis again ? Thank you very much.

I'm new to wiki, I feel like there are people sending me some messages, I read them sometimes but I can't recheck them again. Please tell me how to check & answer them. Thank you very much.

Isparetime (discuss • contribs) 03:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * All recent edits to Allies vs. Axis have been checked and approved.

There are 2 ways for people to contact you on Wikibooks: I have checked and it seems that nobody has left any messages for you recently except for the Welcome message I put on the page (and now this message). --ЗAНИA talk 20:36, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) They can write a message on your Talk Page.  Usually if someone leaves you a message you will get an orange banner at the top of the screen next time you log in (or open a Wikibooks page while logged in).  If you have set up your Wikibooks account with your email address (see: Special:Preferences) you often also receive an email when someone leaves a message on your Talk Page.
 * 2) The other way is for someone to send you an email directly from Wikibooks to your personal email.  This will only be possible if you have set up a registered email address (mentioned above).

recipe conversion
Hi Xania   What about a program that can convert imperial to metric units and vice versa. </BR> Best, Jan</BR> --Jangirke (discuss • contribs) 21:17, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd argue against. A program will, because of the nature of computers, be precise; humans, not so much. A cup of milk should translate to 250ml; a computer program will translate it to 243ml, and I have yet to see a measuring cup in a kitchen that can measure to that precision. Also, some human interaction is really required to adjust everything so that proportions remain valid. At least one recipe book I've seen explicitly states that English units are used because the proportions involved are critical, and precise enough that translation to Metric would wreck the recipes. Chazz (talk) 06:31, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * English units? American units maybe but most British people would be more familiar with metric units than imperial ones and would find them less confusing especially given the different values of pints, quarts, etc. on different sides of the Atlantic.  Anyway, I agree with the above that automated conversion wouldn't be a great idea.  No automation would handle the infamous American cup whose value could mean anything depending on what's inside the cup.  Human conversion or insisting that only metric is used is the way forward.--ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 09:13, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I was quoting from the book. But yes, despite the fact that only the US and Liberia have refused to standardize on SI units, the feet / pounds / degrees F system is called "English units", or worse "Imperial"... which becomes even more confusing when you look into it a bit and see that a US gallon is not the same as a British gallon. Chazz (talk) 17:09, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Could I ask you this ?
Thank you for checking my article.

I'm doing AvsA v2.0 which has a lot differences from v1.0; so I would like to re-update the current Allies vs. Axis as the guide for v2.0 but still want to keep v1.0 guide somewhere for reference.

a) I create Allies vs. Axis_v1.0 and copy current page (v1.0) to that one and rewrite current page to v2.0

b) I re-update current page to v2.0 and leave the v1.0 inside it, which makes it becomes very long page.

c) I re-update current page to v2.0 and delete v1.0. I don't really want this option.

What should I do ? What option is easy for people to check & people (who need it) to follow ? Please advice. Thank you very much.

RE: Welcome
Thanks. --Michaeldsuarez (discuss • contribs) 17:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Saylor.org's Cell Biology
Dear Xania,

This text uses materials that are protected by copyright. While the NCBI is a government institution, and the materials it creates subsequently public domain, they did not create the texts used. They merely host them on their site. Please take down the notice to the contrary, as well as all of the pages of information.
 * I have asked |here for comments <font color="#E66C2C">QU <font color="#306754">TalkQu 15:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I think Quite Unusual may have commented about all things you mentioned but I'm not sure. What notice to the contrary are you refering to?  --ЗAНИA [[Image:Flag_of_Estonia.svg|15px]]talk 19:16, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The notice referred to was text on the page saying the source material was public domain. It wasn't, in fact it was copyright. The book has been deleted to remove all the copyright violations and the 250 offending images at Commons tagged for deletion. Shame as they'd put a lot of effort into it. I see this at Wikipedia a lot. People think that the "public domain if produced by a US government employee in the course of their work" statement means "if it appears on a US.gov website, it is public domain" <font color="#E66C2C">QU <font color="#306754">TalkQu 19:55, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikikids
Hi Xania, you droped your name on Wikikids in 2011. I've been updating and expanding the proposal (which runs in French and Dutch), are you still interested in it ? Bye ! Astirmays (discuss • contribs) 19:31, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Implementing Easier and More Efficient Metadata Tags on Wikibooks
Hi Xania,

I wanted to give you an update on the previously discussed implementation of LRMI metatags on Wikibooks. There is no longer the need to use the html tag extension as was discussed in the previous proposal, because it is now supported by core mediawiki. In addition, these changes sanction all mediawiki installations by default and increase the assurance of LRMI as a long-term standard. If you're not familiar with Schema.org, it is a shared collection of standard schemas that was developed by Google, Bing, Yahoo, and Yandex to allow webmasters to markup their pages in ways recognized by major search providers. This page demonstrates these features in the context of wikisource and can demonstrate the optimization within a Google search engine here.

To understand this implementation in simpler terms, all that would have to be done is for contributors of Wikibooks (and other educational resources) to use the Schema metatags which are already the most widely used and efficient way for content to be accurately organized by all of the big search engines. With this said, let me know if you think it would be worthwhile to implement these metatags now that it will be done via Schema.org, or if you have further questions. Maximilian.Klein.LRMI (discuss • contribs) 04:37, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Please help checking http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Allies_vs._Axis
Hi Xania,

Please help checking this Allies vs. Axis help book, I have updated it to v2.0. Recently I encounter 1 IP trying to vandalize it, he changed it to WW3 & hitler things which are nothing relate to this help book. Please be a little careful when checking it, you may check the vandalized data.

Thank you very much,

Admin userbox
Would you like to add User admin to your user page? You seem to be the only admin not listed in Category:Wikibooks administrators. - dcljr (discuss • contribs) 04:04, 9 November 2013 (UTC)