User talk:D. Matt Innis/Archive 3

D. Matt Innis

Current talk page

Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4, Archive 5, Archive 6, Archive 7, Archive 8, Archive 9, Archive 10

error in Approved entry

Matt: I'm flattered that both you and Stephen Ewen have suggested I apply for editorship but I don't know my way around this programme. I enjoy writing and I've done my fair share but I'm not convinced I am (at this stage) savvy with the ins and outs of the citizendium foremat. I suspect that I'm not expected to put this at the top of your query list which seems to me unusual that you should have to scroll through past notes to find mine but that's my ignorance.

 Regards Launt.                                 Launt Thompson 20:15, 24 August 2007 (CDT)

Hi Matt,

I just noticed a small but embarrassing error in Northwest Passage. In the section, "The Franklin Expedition and Seach," third paragraph, the text reads:

"Additional searches, including one by a flotilla of ships under the command of the unfortunate (and unfortunately-named) Admiral Belcher in 1853-54, found no further traces. "

This dates in this should be changed to 1852-54. Could you make this change for me?

Many thanks as ever, Russell Potter 13:50, 14 June 2007 (CDT)

Got it. --Matt Innis (Talk) 14:10, 14 June 2007 (CDT)

Thanks, Matt! Wow, you work fast! Russell Potter 14:17, 14 June 2007 (CDT)

Ancient Celtic music

Hi Matt,

Thanks for the heads up! The author is making a few final adjustments at the moment, and we've been in touch several times; I will have a look see later this afternoon or in the early evening (East Coast Time) and let you know when to do the magic! Cheers, Russell Potter 10:38, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

Sounds like a plan, I am East Coast, too. --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:42, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

Hi Matt -- just talked with the author again -- he feels it is ready. I gave it a quick re-read, looking for copyediting, not content changes, and it looks fine. Go ahead and tag it as Approved -- I will update the Approvals announcement page later today.

I'm also looking for any entries getting close to Approval -- I see that there is talk of this over at United States Electoral College -- do you know of any others that are close enough to be ready to publicize? Thanks as ever, Russell Potter 10:48, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

Not off the top of my head, French fries still has a way to go :-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:55, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

LOL on French Fries -- who knew how controversial they'd be! I just updated the pointer for Ancient Celtic music, thanks for the note. Russell Potter 11:16, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

Literature correction

Matt:

Just saw a post by Mike Brown on the Forums:

"In "Literature" (http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Literature), appears the sentence "Even writers whose works now seem essential to their national literature, such as Goethe or Shakespeare, only became legitimate subjects of serious academic consideration very late in the twentieth century, when national vernacular literatures became subjects for schools and universities." Here, "twentieth" is presumably a typo for "nineteenth"."

He's right -- could you, as you did for Northwest Passage, make and notate this small corection, replacing "twentieth" with "nineteenth"?

Thanks again, Russell Potter 11:31, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

Done. Should not be a problem from the acting Approval manager. --Matt Innis (Talk) 11:54, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

Oxfords

Hi Matt,

Just discovered that I am guilty of creating two confusing stubs -- one for Oxford University, one for University of Oxford! The first is the more recent and more accrate, though they are both quite similar; "Oxford University" also seems a better title.

Would you please delete University of Oxford? No rush, just whenever you get a chance ....

cheers,

Russell Potter 13:21, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

Hold that thought. The official name is University of Oxford. I know they are interchangable but I think the official name would be better. Ask Gareth, he is at the University of Edinburgh, commonly referred to as Edinburgh University. Chris Day (talk) 16:15, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

By the way a better a pproach is a redirect, I am going to be proactive and do that right now. Chris Day (talk) 16:24, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

Looks like ya'll have it all under control. Glad to be of service :-) -Matt Innis (Talk) 19:35, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

popups

No, it does not work, sorry :( In fact, I've just commented it out in my monobook as useless. This is one thing from WP I'm missing  ;-) In fact, I tried to use the adaptation by User:Nicholas_Kaye-Smith. Once it almost worked (i.e. I had some popups but they were not fully functional). Don't know why it is no longer the case. As you see I'm just a scripting kiddie :) --Aleksander Stos 10:46, 27 June 2007 (CDT)

PS. I'm testing "autoedits" and it seems to work. You make a (long) html address containing a desired action on the wiki (e.g. inserting a welcome message, deleting a category, fixing a typo), you enter it in your browser and you're done. Useful for some mechanical (massive) operations. Imagine that you prepare a list of links in a file and then just click one after another. Something like a human assisted robot (you can wish to see the result before accepting). I plan to use it to delete CZ_Live tag, as discussed here. If you found it useful for other purposes just let me know and I'll show you how it works.

Shucks, I was really hoping you figured it out :-) If you do, don't forget about me!!! I'd almost pay for that one. Let me know how the autoedits works, too. --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:51, 27 June 2007 (CDT)

Way to go

...attacking the late-night-exhausted-edits-of-the-inhebriate ;D (leaving for prosperity and to remind me to commit utter acts of humiliative revenge, mwa ha ha.)--Robert W King 15:27, 28 June 2007 (CDT)

Hehe, threats, idle threats, all of them :))) --Matt Innis (Talk) 15:32, 28 June 2007 (CDT)

Chiropractor

I used to have a bad back went to a chiropractor and after several sessions the pain went away. THen a few years later I was sore again and went back for a tune-up. But she wasn't in her office so I left. To leave I had to drive around her building, and as soon as I did that the pain went away! A couple years later I got a burning pain in my shoulder form watching this monitor, so I went back and again she wasn't there. Again I drive away and the pain went away. I haven't any problems since. How does she do that?

Thomas Mandel 21:15, 28 June 2007 (CDT)

I suppose it could have been that the aspirin kicked in about the time you got in your car ;-) But it probably has more to do with how good looking she was.. it never works that well for me. But a Zen master would know how to make it work! Either way, next time, I would also suggest that you call ahead to make sure she is not there. :))) --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:29, 28 June 2007 (CDT)

Terrorism

as military editor I would like to nominate Terrorism for approval. What's the next step? Richard Jensen 20:19, 29 June 2007 (CDT)

Richard, I'll tag it tonight if Matt does not beat me to it. Stephen Ewen 20:23, 29 June 2007 (CDT)

Let's teach Richard how to do it! --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:31, 29 June 2007 (CDT)

yes, I've just tried it. Richard Jensen 20:36, 29 June 2007 (CDT)

Bridgewater State College

Hi Matt -- just a note, wondering why you deleted this entry, which I'd brought in with intent to expand, and which is linked and germane to the history of schools of education in the U.S. .... Russell Potter 16:53, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

I just now deleted the talk page as there was no article attached to it... I assume I deleted that last month ;-0 It must have had a speedydelete.. Do you need it? --Matt Innis (Talk) 16:56, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

Hi Matt! My bad, the version I had in mind was prior to the one speedydeleted -- I have restored some of what I'd placed there, and will edit and tweak to bring it to LIVE status ASAP. Cheers, Russell Potter 17:16, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

Okay, hope I wasn't the one that deleted the first version ;-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 17:31, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

Qigong

Hi, Matt. I added a little more in the biginning which should help with your questions. Just remember, all energy is consider a form of Qi. Therefore, the only kind that hasn't been proven to exist that that which animates our life forces. BTW, what does CDT mean. I thought it was Central Daylight Time. So why does everyone use it? Thanks. Gary Giamboi 18:16, 30 June 2007 (EDT)

Checklist? gasp!

What, me? No way! Aleta Curry 21:30, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

Thanks for doing the checklist at working dog. I suppose I'll learn eventually. I've had something "thrown out" of a workgroup recently, (she pouts) so I'm reluctant and more inclined to let someone else decide. Aleta Curry 18:12, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Thrown out! Holy moly, I know that hurts ;-) No problem, though. Sometimes I don't even put the category in and check "y" in the "cat check" spot. With all the personalities around here, you aren't going to make all of them happy! The important part is just that it gets a checklist so it doesn't get deleted by some passing constable (who me?) --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:20, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Well, this wasn't my finest hour. The Kennel Club help, please! And thanks for the note at user: Aleta Curry/dogs cool Aleta Curry 01:57, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Matt, it is I (yes, again).

I think the checklist help thingy is great. I seem to see a discrepancy between your "in brief" bit on "cat_check" and the long instructions: The 'cat_check' field - Check categories?

I also think the long instructions part about underlinked articles could be clearer. I always thought that meant articles don't have enough links in them, and not, as you say in "in brief", links to them from other articles. I think the long instructions should say check "what links here".

Aleta Curry 17:21, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Yay, Matt, I did it!! (Talk:Dog show). Your checklist help works a treat. Further to the above, I think you should add to your "in brief" to deleted the instructions AND the pre no-wiki stuff at the beginning and the end of the chart. (Remember, if the user has no knowledge, you can't presume any--go slowly and use small words! :) Aleta Curry 18:12, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

More on the templated: change "it's" to "its",if you would, and at the bottom of "In brief" I would add "If you need more detailed instructions, click here" because by the time they've copied and pasted, they don't have the link in front of them any longer. I'll go away now. Happy 4th of July! Aleta Curry 18:10, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

Félix d'Hérelle

This is set to be approved today. I can't, was to involved getting the images in order.  —Stephen Ewen (Talk) 03:44, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Sounds good for Approval, though I notice a lot of changes since the pointer. I'll give it till this afternoon because David is on the other side of the world ;-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 09:29, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Seems all ok to approve with New pointer. While on the road at a foreign computer, David Tribe 02:38, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

Next approvals

Hi Matt, thanks for the update.

Next up are Terrorism and John Franklin, both tagged to be Approved tomorrow, followed by Shirley Chisholm and Joan of Arc on the 7th. Also, not sure what to to with Aikido, whose deadline has passed, but which has unanswered concerns on its Talk page. Have a look, Best, Russell Potter 09:20, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

You did the right thing with Aikido -- we'll just have to keep sailing, uncharted waters or no! Thanks, Russell Potter 11:32, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

Hi Matt. Today's the day for Terrorism and John Franklin. I am happy with both entries (I only worked on the latter); check with Richard, and if he's satisfied with them then if you could perform the magic, I'd be grateful as ever. Cheers, Russell Potter 09:08, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

Glad to.. see you there. --Matt Innis (Talk) 09:17, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

Matt, many thanks for waving the wiki-wand on John Franklin -- looks great. Russell Potter 11:12, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

Hi Matt -- sorry one other thing -- I just noticed, in reading it over, an inaccurate parenthetical statement in John Franklin, one which somehow escaped my diligent eye. Must be a leftover from some WP text. It's in the "Search for Franklin" section and reads:

(More ships and men were lost looking for Franklin than in the expedition)

But it's inaccurate. No more than two dozen men died in the search for Franklin, as opposed to the 129 who died in the expedition. I'll leave it to your judgment as to whether this is the kind of "copyediting" change that can be made without a new Approval -- if not, I'll put this note in the /Draft article's Talk page. Russell Potter 19:08, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

Since you are the Approvals Management Editor, I think that you have the right to make edits such as these with me as your 'right arm', especially since you are the author that wrote the sentence and there should be no controversy in changing it. I'll doublecheck to make sure that section has not changed, but otherwise I'll make the changes according to your instructions as Approval Manager from the author who wrote it. --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:10, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

Thanks, Matt, I really appreciate it! It's always amazing to me how little bits of wikipedia get 'caught in the teeth' even after you think you've had a good brushing! Russell Potter 08:51, 7 July 2007 (CDT)

Especially the older you get! (thanks for the reminder;-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 09:00, 7 July 2007 (CDT)

Hi Matt -- I think the Approval timer is set to today for Joan of Arc and Shirley Chisholm -- Richard, I think nominated both. The only change to Joan is the addition of an image; the only change to Chisholm that I know of is a switch from one version of the photo to another (see long chat on Talk page). If you could check with RJ and see if they're set, I'd be grateful. Cheers, Russell Potter 16:15, 7 July 2007 (CDT)

I followed those two and they are OK for approval now Richard Jensen 17:05, 7 July 2007 (CDT)

Help!

I'm almost sputtering for words at the spin the Orient / Orientalism articles. Please help or please help me enlist others who can help. If this becomes a war of attrition, one side loses because I don't have time to defend these baseless accusations that argue by deletion rather than by refutation. Will Nesbitt 13:50, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

I stopped in and took a look at the discussion page. It seems this article is still taking shape. You can consider contacting other editors as well, or talk to Richard personally. These things take time and effort, so hang in there and I am sure everything will work out to your satisfaction as well. I'll keep an eye out. --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:36, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

I removed stuff that said nothing about the topic. It was POV imported from Wiki that degraded the content and instead railed against American textbooks for being sensitive to minorities in terms of language. The material that did relate to the topic was kept and a lot of fresh new scholarship was added. Richard Jensen 16:25, 5 July 2007 (CDT)

You left pornographic references in but mischarecterized Fair Housing law. Will Nesbitt 21:50, 11 July 2007 (CDT)

I am sure you both agree that both articles are far from finished. Concentrate on the content and lets build something valuable. --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:59, 11 July 2007 (CDT)

Matt, I'm not sure how to precede. I'm edited away (literally) thirty seconds after posting without so much as a reference or reason. I'm not sure why "conservative" labels are allowed, but liberal ones are not. If this is a war of attrition, then Richard wins. I don't mind debate, but this is almost getting silly. Will Nesbitt 22:06, 11 July 2007 (CDT)

Will Nesbitt seems to think that liberals changed the language for their purposes, and conservatives are fighting back. That's not true at all. Starting in the 1960s a lot of ethnic groups demanded that nasty terms applying to them be considered insulting and a disgrace to the user. That happened to words like "Jap" and "Oriental" and "Asiatic". Liberals, conservatives and folks in between agreed and stopped using the terms. All the dictionaries agree these are taboo words--they are used by criminal gangs and pornographers for that very reason. The job of CZ is not to set usage standards, it's to tell users what the current standards are. Richard Jensen 22:33, 11 July 2007 (CDT)

Responded on Talk:Orient. --Matt Innis (Talk) 23:15, 11 July 2007 (CDT)

more help

I just noticed you editing. Can you follow up on this (Talk:Biology/Draft#Gallery_template) please? Thanks Chris Day (talk) 10:52, 11 July 2007 (CDT)

Hi Matt, another quick favor could you update the gallery template to the following. {{Gallery header|group=biology|approved=yes}} Thanks Chris Day (talk) 23:54, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

Here is another one to fix. Could you change the current text in Tux/Gallery "'This gallery is part of the Approved Tux article." to {{Gallery header|group=computers|approved=yes}}, again thanks. Chris Day (talk) 11:20, 13 July 2007 (CDT)

Tux/Gallery

Matt, in the captions of the first and the second picture of Tux/Gallery, the name of the city Canberra is wrong, it is written Canbrerra. Versuri 08:57, 14 July 2007 (CDT)

Got it! Almost missed one ;-) Thanks Versuri, --Matt Innis (Talk) 09:08, 14 July 2007 (CDT)

References

Okay, more trouble from me (sorry). I posted a new article, did the checklist (ha!) and the categories, but alas, the formating I had in MS Word for the footnotes didn't come out. I need help please at butler.

I have to go and take care of a sick filly, but I'll be back presently to learn how to do this.

Thanks, Matt.

Aleta Curry 18:15, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

Subpages

Hi Matt, I finished messing around with the subpages 9 template. I modified it so that the unused subpages only appears on the draft page. I figure that readers would not care but those working on the draft version would care. Chris Day (talk) 21:49, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

That is soooo cool. This is going to be good. --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:48, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

Wiki

Thanks Matt. My friend Eric has given me approval to transport his wiki articles to CZ, but I'm a bit clueless. I'll read the article you mentioned asap. Cheers!--Yim Kai-mun 21:51, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

Names

lol, no!! Yim is my surname. Maybe if I was in China, they'd call me (Xiao Yan/Siu Yim) Little Yim, but I've got a "proper" Christian name, Julie-Ann (Jules). My friends call me Jules. :)--Yim Kai-mun 21:59, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

lmao

Oh, you'd laugh your arse off if you knew what my surname means - Yim is literally "strict, severe, stern, austere" in the Cantonese language. :D I try to live up to my name, but as you can see I'm not quite successful! :P--Yim Kai-mun 22:03, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

Oops, guess I better straighten up >:| --Matt Innis (Talk) 22:07, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

<wields wudang jian> (I really do have a sword like the kind you see in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon). :P--Yim Kai-mun 22:27, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

My last name means Warrior. :-)  —Stephen Ewen (Talk) 22:36, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

Awesome. Looks like we both have "warrior" in our heritage. Mine is a warrior family. :)--Yim Kai-mun 22:57, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

Hmm, mine means "Island". Looks like I'm all alone on this one. --Matt Innis (Talk) 07:07, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

Innis...as in Innisfree, etc.? That sounds Irish lol. Am I right? --Yim Kai-mun 23:02, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

You got it, though that is just the name :-), my father was of Scotch/Irish/German descent while mom was full Italian. To top it off - dad was pentacostal and mom was catholic. I am not real sure what that makes me, other than very open minded! Hopefully I got the best of both worlds ;-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 08:00, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

I once heard a man describe himself as a pentecathobaptimethobryterian. :-)  —Stephen Ewen (Talk) 03:31, 19 July 2007 (CDT)

I think I'm from royalty--does this mean that you must bow to me?--Robert W King 11:13, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Well, that depends on whether you are Scotch, Irish, German, or the Pope! --Matt Innis (Talk) 11:22, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

I'm a mutt.  :-)  —Stephen Ewen (Talk) 03:31, 19 July 2007 (CDT)

Hey! We might be related! --Matt Innis (Talk) 07:39, 19 July 2007 (CDT)

My surname has a royal origin. Too bad it ain't hereditary! Boohoo. This here bloke's the one. --Yim Kai-mun 20:03, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Hey, you might be related to Robert! --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:31, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

(Outdent) Bet you can't guess what my last name means. :-) --Joe Quick (Talk) 01:15, 19 July 2007 (CDT)

Hold on... hurry, hurry, Oh, let me think, let me think - shucks, I give up, what is it. :D --Matt Innis (Talk) 07:40, 19 July 2007 (CDT)

Hehe. I actually don't know. It was "Kvik" or something like that until the family got to Ellis Island. The family is Dutch but the people I've asked who actually speak Dutch say it doesn't mean anything to them... --Joe Quick (Talk) 14:42, 22 July 2007 (CDT)

wiki articles

This here is the link on the China History Forum, where Eric posted up his list of articles. As you can see, I've got my work cut out for me![1]--Yim Kai-mun 22:27, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

Wow, that is great! You do have your work cut out for you... but you can do it!!! Take your time and it should be a great addition, especially with the new plans for subpages that are going on. I can see an entire volume of chinese articles in one infoset. --Matt Innis (Talk) 22:30, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

^_^ I'm on it. ;) Good to know I have folks in my corner.--Yim Kai-mun 22:53, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

Let's test an approved article.

Can you replace the approved template on the Chiropractic article with the following, as an experiment.

{{subpages9|editor=D. Matt Innis|group=Healing Arts|approved=yes}}

Thanks a lot Chris Day (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

Done! Check it out. --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:17, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

Well, if I liked specifically the tabbed subpages better before, I like them all the more now. :-)  —Stephen Ewen (Talk) 21:59, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

Um...

Um...

--Robert W King 11:27, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Oops.. that's not what it looked like on mine :0 --Matt Innis (Talk) 13:18, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Well, my NFPA template looked right on my screen; damn browser issues!--Robert W King 13:16, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

What about on firefox? Chris Day (talk) 13:31, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Mine's IE 7.0 and it looks good. --Matt Innis (Talk)

Robert is using IE 6? Sounds like they might have some weird code in that MS software. Chris Day (talk) 13:43, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

The issue is more or less, not everyone uses IE7; some still use IE6, others believe it or not are still on 5, and some are using Netscape (god forbid!)--Robert W King 13:40, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Firefox - displays perfectly. BTW, Firefox has a program that is people download it through CZ, we get a little jingle.  —Stephen Ewen (Talk) 03:35, 19 July 2007 (CDT)

Lumbalgia

Lumbalgia is looking pretty good. Only suggestion is deleting the surgery section's content and replace with something like "Surgery may be considered when back pain is due to specific causes including herniated lumbar disk and spinal stenosis." This would avoid having to maintain this content when those articles later mature.

I need to pass on the idea of helping approve an article. At most, I can contribute time to adding new studies as they come out (since I have to do this anyway for my job), then clean up the few sentences surrounding the new addition.

I am still unclear on the meaning of approval. Lets say you this article is approved, what happens when new content is added? Robert Badgett 10:48, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

What happens is that once we get it the way we want it, the Lumbalgia article gets protected and a copy is made on Lumbalgia/Draft where people (including us) add any new changes. Anytime you feel you're ready, we re-approve the article and it replaces the version that the public sees. We can re-approve anytime three editors agree that it is ready. The idea is to keep any edit warring from showing to the public and the only thing that will show is things that everyone agrees to. You don't have to agree to be the third editor right now. You can wait until we get it to the place that you would feel good about putting your name on it. In fact, you are expected to take the ToApprove tag off if you think something is wrong at anytime because you are an editor in the workgroup. The idea is that we all need to agree it is good. If we don't, it never gets approved. I'll keep working slowly and you can feel free to jump in and edit anytime if I go astray on your area of expertise... By the way, I think we could expand the surgery section and get a lot more detailed, perhaps even getting pictures and forking off articles on each technique, etc., but I would definitely need help there. I would concentrate on the conservative methods.. --Matt Innis (Talk) 11:00, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

On wikipedia, I tried expanding the surgery section on the low back pain article and it became a nightmare. I finally found it was easier to leave surgery to the pages for the specific conditions that warrant surgery.

Unrelated note: if you use diberri, try http://medinformatics.uthscsa.edu/wiki/diberri.shtml

(Bob) Robert Badgett 11:48, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

Hey, that is neat Bob! Now I have to find a spot to use it! I definitely understand the wikipedia dilemna. I finally had to quit adding information to the chiropractic article just because there were so many emotional battles to get anything to stick. I don't think we need to worry about that here. We can't have a quality lumbalgia article without thoroughly exploring the surgery options, especially after the new research that has come out showing the two year follow ups compared to non-surgical patients. I don't feel qualified to add that information, though, but you are the expert there!!! By the way, I know that John Triano is a chiropractor at the Texas Back Institute, are you close to that? --Matt Innis (Talk) 22:10, 22 July 2007 (CDT)

Hi

Hi Matt,

I was 'working' today, so it gives me a lot of time to do stuff on the net. This isn't going to be a regular occurance (Me working hard)

Regards Denis Cavanagh 14:08, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

Sorry to hear that! You need to get to 'work' more often ;-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:33, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

Another favour

{{subpages|group=biology|approved=yes}} That template on the Biology/Gallery would be great. Thanks Chris Day (talk) 10:42, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

Got it. --Matt Innis (Talk) 20:33, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

CZ:The Article Checklist

Dear D. Matt Innis,

I am new to Citizendium, and have just finished my first ever article, Port Arthur massacre. I must apologise that I do not understand what you meant by the article checklist. Should I add something to the talk page? Would it be easier if someone else added it, so that I could understand, and then I simply alter it?

I do not feel that the article is complete, as it is currently too lengthy and it may still contain some editorialising. Also some of the facts may need checking. I kept finding things where Damien Bugg was called Damian, and where it had 8.45am instead of 8.25am, and things like that. Whilst 95% of it is referenced, some sections may also need references too.

Thank you for your assistance.

Adrian Meredith 00:25, 22 July 2007 (CDT)

Of course Adrian! I will meet you on your article's talk page. --Matt Innis (Talk) 07:05, 22 July 2007 (CDT)

d'Hérelle and Twort

Hi Matt, just noticed that Félix d'Hérelle and Frederick Twort are sorting incorrectly (both under F instead of under d and T) on the Approved Articles page. Is there a way to fix this? Russell Potter 08:45, 22 July 2007 (CDT)

Wow, good catch. It looks like this is a {{Approved}} template issue. I know Chris Day can fix it, and maybe Stephen. I am not familiar with this 'inner workings' of the magic of templates ;-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 09:03, 22 July 2007 (CDT)

Yes it is easy to fix you need to replace the respective templates with the following. {{approved|editor=David Tribe|group=Biology|abc=d'Herelle, Félix}} {{approved|editor=David Tribe|group=Biology|abc=Twort, Frederick}} And while your are at it. Could you replace the Life approval template with {{Subpages4}} I know that might sound crazy but you will get a pleasant surprise. Chris Day (talk) 15:09, 24 July 2007 (CDT)

Done: Chris - this is IE 7.0:

Great more browser incompatabilities! I'll try and fix it. I noticed making the window smaller causes problems too. What a pain. Thanks for adding it to the page. At least now I can trouble shoot. I hope Larry is alright with this. Chris Day (talk) 15:40, 24 July 2007 (CDT)

I am soooo glad you are here!! I hope you know that ;-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 15:37, 24 July 2007 (CDT)

butler

Hi Matt,

I know you're busy, but I'm asking you and Stephen to have a look at butler when you have a chance and give me your opinions. I updated the status because I'm now happy with it. Thanks. Aleta Curry 00:03, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

Looks great, Aleta! Though, this is not something I have any knowledge about ;-) We need to find an editor to nominate it. Have you contacted any of them in the workgroups? --Matt Innis (Talk) 08:42, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

I haven't, out of bashfulness. I wanted a couple of opinions from people I find non-intimidating first. I also didn't know whether it was policy to nominate one's own work. Thanks! Aleta Curry 16:44, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

Gay marketing

Matt - thanks for your help with the checklist on Gay marketing article, and also for the welcoming message. As that was my first article it was interesting hitting "Save page" for the first time. Your comment was most constructive and I am grateful for it. Thanks again for your assistance. --Ian Johnson 04:17, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

No problem, you know where to find me! --Matt Innis (Talk) 08:43, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

CZ Live

Matt, I got your msg. Yes they are all my own work as I plan that all the work I do here should not originate from WP, so what is the note that you were suggesting I should "leave (as) a message at the very top of the article so nobody will ask (me) again"? I thought that was what "CZ Live" meant? --Ian Johnson 15:09, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

Consider it done! And thanks for the tip.--Ian Johnson 15:17, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

Popups from a layman's view

Hi Matt. Answered you at my can we talk? page. Aleta Curry 16:47, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

butler, again

Okay, got a bit of a problem. WRT to looking for approval nomination. butler falls into sociology/anthropology, with crossover to film/literature/theatre because it’s an iconic role in those areas.

Trouble is, no anthro/soc editors seem to be active at the moment.

• Douglas R. White would seem a likely candidate, also

• Richard J. Senghas

Well, I was going to ask Russell Potter, because he does a good bit of anthro as well as li and visual arts…’nuff said.

Any ideas?

p.s. I will have the same problem with great house, valet, footman etc. when I get around to them.

Aleta Curry 00:22, 30 July 2007 (CDT)

A last request

Hi Matt,

Just a brief note to say bye - and to thank you for all of your excellent work over all the time I've been associated with CZ. I have just a few final requests before I head off into the virtual sunset:

• Could you make the correction from "before or after the emergence" (which is nonsense) to the correct "before the emergence" in the Approved version of Literature? Larry noticed this one, and if it happens that this becomes the Article of the Week, this gaffe ought to be fixed. There's a note about this at the bottom of the Talk page.

• Could you please protect my User page? I'd like to make sure it stays there, but don't want to have it be editable.

• Could you please block my account for editing? It would just make the transition easier for me, if I'm not tempted to drop by and niggle over things. If I ever do change my mind, I will ask you or another constable to unblock.

With all best regards and admiration to you, Russell Potter 11:49, 31 July 2007 (CDT)

Russell, I see that Stephen and Larry have followed through with your requests. I do look forward to your return! --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:07, 20 August 2007 (CDT)

Approval pending

Hi Matt, the article Gaius Iulius Caesar (name) should have been approved by now. Maybe you can guide Catherine through the final steps.
Thanks & cheers.  Arne Eickenberg  talk 18:17, 7 August 2007 (CDT)

So how do you like the metadata template as a tool towards approval? Does it make it easier or more confusing? Chris Day (talk) 22:03, 20 August 2007 (CDT)

It will be easier by far. It took me awhile to find things, but once I did, it was easier. I am sure next time will go smooth. I did have concern about taking out the ToApprove information... is information stored about which version was approved? I am thinking that we just keep moving the Draft version to the "ReApproved" Main article? But how will we know what the previous version was (if it matters)--Matt Innis (Talk) 22:23, 20 August 2007 (CDT)

I think we can cut and paste that into the approval page. Then we have a hard copy as well as the history of the metadata page. Chris Day (talk) 06:38, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

Check out this edit here with respect to a transparent archive of the approval process for each article. Chris Day (talk) 08:05, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

I notice when you did the approval you forgot to adjust the satus which resulted in the approval template not appearing on the article. Was that confusing? I could code in an error message to catch this error ( a approval template would appear but it would say "there is a conflict between approving editors and article status", or such) that would act as a reminder for the approving sysop to change the articles status too. Or will it be fine when a real list of instructions appears? Chris Day (talk) 08:11, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

This seems to be something that I always miss!! It might be nice to have such a reminder, though now that I know the Approved template won't show up I doubt I will miss it again :) The problem was that I scanned the page rather than actually reading it as the process was rather intuitive once I read your first instructions, but I missed the line on the actual template page. Most people might not miss it as they would read it while I am too familiar with the old process and tend not to read the instructions! My bad ;-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:15, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

Request for editor towards approval

Do we have a mechanism to request editors? How do authors go about getting their articles approved if they don't know an editor? Is this something we have discussed before? If so, I don't remember, but it seems like a very important step, in fact, the first step for most people in the approval process. We need to get a protocol developed, or you need to point me to the links that i have missed :) Chris Day (talk) 21:32, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

This was something the Approvals Manager was doing (going around looking for finished articles and finding editors to approve them), but we seem to have lost both of them to fatique. I would think that an author should be able to go to the workgroup and email the editors and ask for help, though sometimes there is no response. It would be nioce to have a check box that an author can check on the checklist that says it is ready for review and it would notify all the editors in the workgroup... is that possible? --Matt Innis (Talk) 07:45, 22 August 2007 (CDT)

Starting on drafts

The more I think about this the more I side towards starting everything as a draft (see Japan). First tier articles should be reserved for approved articles. This should hasten the approval process since authors will want to see their articles occupy that article space. An even more radical approach might be to only have the approved article viewable to users who are not logged in. Drastic i know, but again a strategy to speed up the time from an article being created to the first approval. I'm no psychologist, so I'm not sure if I'm dealing with good carrots here, or will drive people off. Any thoughts? Chris Day (talk) 21:32, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

This sounds like a solution to several problems that makes sense. There has been some discussion on the forums hasn't there? Let's take the next step... how about using Japan as an example. --Matt Innis (Talk) 07:47, 22 August 2007 (CDT)

These ideas have been put forward by me in the very early stages of the project, but consequently been shot down by Larry. Kim van der Linde 09:40, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

But good ideas come back. :-) Gareth Leng 11:05, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

And birds of a feather! Gareth, see this. Maybe you can help Kim get her work approved. I'll be glad to do the mechanics. --Matt Innis (Talk) 11:50, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

I began anew a forum discussion on this topic, see http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,1170.0.html  —Stephen Ewen (Talk) 13:22, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

I responded. --Matt Innis (Talk) 13:27, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

Heavy structure

Matt. The current way CZ wants to do things is way to heavy, to bureaucratic and to eliminating for good willing editors (oh, authors). I feared this already when I was one of the first to discuss the earliest ideas of CZ, and I left because of the top-down, elitist, central control mentality, combined with censorship and some other issues. Anyway, of the biology editors, nobody can actually judge whether my article is good (it is), if one can find one that is active at all, because a few actually do anything at all. Most of those 30 are just category filling. Anyway, I will see how it goes from here, and whether CZ actually really want to get going or is going to be a rough duplicate of the Digital Universe.Kim van der Linde 09:39, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

Have you asked User:Gareth Leng to consider putting your article up for Approval? He can use the individual editor approval process whether you are an editor or an author. Sometimes we have to use the spirit of the law when we interpret the fine details. I think the spirit of Citizendium is meant to facilitate writers that enjoy writing neutrally and appreciate the camaraderie of collaboration such as yourself. Unfortunately, occasionally we make rules that shoot ourselves in the foot. Hopefully, they will evolve as we do. --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:05, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

You know, why the heck do I have to search for an editor to approve the article? It is in CZ's benefit to get approved articles, and get them fast. Kim van der Linde 10:08, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

Good Point. You should be spending your time writing good articles. Someone who enjoys administration should be handling the logistics of approval. That may take some time, so you just keep writing. --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:19, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

I'd also add that you can also get your own article linked from a list of well-developed articles without seeking anyone's approval. Simply make the checklist "status" a 1. Bear in mind that others may, of course, call this rating into question, as any particular data point in CZ. --Larry Sanger 10:31, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

Larry, though I realize that this was recently the job of our approvals manager, it seems that this should be a workgroup leads responsibility. When there is no workgroup lead, perhaps a little help from the editor in chief might be in order to 'motivate' the appropriate editors to act on the article. I realize that you are the editor in chief now and have other responsibilities, but when we are ultimately put together, it seems to me the EIC be the one responsible for organizing and motivating his/her editors rather than expect someone new (who has joined the project and only wants to concentrate on writing) to hunt someone down. If we set up the template to allow authors to 'call' the workgroup lead, then the ball can keep rolling and the author can move on to more writing. Kim makes a good point and we can move in this direction, of course hopefully Kim will help us do that :-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:53, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

I completely support the creation of a "call template" and a page whereby people can check it daily. Simple, standardized. Something like, An author So-and-so has requested a Biology editor review this article for approval and so forth. It would have categories so editors can peruse article titles from an approval request page. To me this is a no-brainer, let's just do it. For now, Kim, when you are not sure who can approve an article, just make a post on CZ Talk:Biology Workgroup and ask.  —Stephen Ewen (Talk) 11:03, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

Or, to reach the biology editors who don't check CZ Talk:Biology Workgroup, use our "push" solution: CZ-Biology. --Larry Sanger 11:38, 23 August 2007 (CDT) (wish I had more time....)

Larry, the number of active editors is virtually zero for biology to start with, most of them are category filling material. As far as I can tell, I have now already spoken to all active biology editors..... There is a desperate need to more editors/authors, not more structure. The lighter the system can be, the easier it is to follow for newcomers, the more likely you are to attract and TO KEEP editors/authors. Kim van der Linde 12:05, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

Matt's page--and the wiki generally--is not the place to discuss your proposals to change our editorial processes, Kim. Try the forums. --Larry Sanger 12:38, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

Ok Larry, it is clear. Bye. Kim van der Linde 12:44, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

Draft category

The draft category is currently not placed by subpages, although all the other categories are on the article page. The draft cats were originally so the 'related changes' could be used to track new edits to biology workgroup draft pages. Is this a feature we want to maintain since it is easy to place such a category on the draft page using the subpages template.

Another option I tested successfully was to have a "biology workgroup watchlist" category. In that case the article, draft page, all subpages and the talk page were in a category so one link could show ALL recent biology workgroup edits. The draw back is that it shows every edit not just the most recent edit. This is less desirable since if one editor makes many small edits to one article it overwhelms the so called watchlist. Chris Day (talk) 14:34, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

So is that basically like a "recent changes" page except it only has your workgroup? That might not be so bad.. especially as we get bigger and more edits overall. --Matt Innis (Talk) 14:41, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

Exactly. It is quite easy to do but adds to the category load at the bottom of each page. Chris Day (talk) 14:45, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

Of which pages and how big a load? The article pages? That could be a problem I suppose.. --Matt Innis (Talk) 15:14, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

All subpages, the article and the talk pages will have one extra link for each workgroup. Possibly more of a problem are the tens of thousands of pages in one category. Imagine if the biology workgroup has 1000 articles with an average of 5 subpages. That could add up to between 10-12 thousand pages in one category (Biology Workgroup Watchlist). Would this be a problem? it might be easier to get it coded into the mediawiki and just such that real workgroup watchlists are a reality. Besides the real watchlist is far better than the related changes feature since it only shows the most recent edit for any given page. This feature stops one articles flurry of edits dominating the top of the list. Chris Day (talk) 16:11, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

Sounds like too much. I think you're right that we need code for the workgroup watchlist.. so how long will that take you to learn :-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 16:57, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

{{approval}}

To facilitate the use of this template on the approval page we should probably juggle the field order on the metadata page by sticking the checklist cats adjacent to the ToApprove fields and moving the approved fields down so they follow the ToApprove fields. Then, no deletion of fields is even required, just a cut and paste job. Chris Day (talk) 14:45, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

Oh yeah, that's even better!!! I'll take another step out of my instructions. --Matt Innis (Talk) 14:46, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

Reworded above for clarity but same point made. That is the beauty of the fields since any order works in the template. Chris Day (talk) 14:49, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

That is also the beauty of having someone who knows how to do it!!! --Matt Innis (Talk) 14:51, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

disparity?

Why is this template different to the one generate by the metadata? Politics added to metadta and it has a different article url? Chris Day (talk) 21:40, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

The one on the Talk page was placed by Roger Lohmann first with only the current url (people don't seem to know how to do this). Did he place ploitics in that one? He partially filled out he metadata page but no subpages9 on all the pages so nothing showed up till I did that. Also changed some of his data. I didn't know you were watching, too. --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:44, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

Always watching ;) Chris Day (talk) 21:55, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

Hehe, me, too. Who's watching the watchers :-) --Matt Innis (Talk) 21:57, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

There are a lot of steps in this subpage project. I'm sure if all the articles were started with the subpages, then just filling out the ToApprove section in the metadata page would be simpler. This time I had to do both which was time consuming for sure. --Matt Innis (Talk) 22:07, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

007

Why is Roger Moore not listed as an editor? Chris Day (talk) 14:17, 6 September 2007 (CDT)

As editor of Saintly activities? Hayford Peirce 14:26, 6 September 2007 (CDT)

Are you sure he is that pure? You may need top rate Persuaders! to convince me otherwise. Chris Day (talk) 14:40, 6 September 2007 (CDT)

Perhaps he is an imposter ;-), just in case he isn't, I'll check into it! --Matt Innis (Talk) 14:46, 6 September 2007 (CDT)

I have emailed our target. Let you know what happens. --Matt Innis (Talk) 14:49, 6 September 2007 (CDT)

Thanks

Thanks - I'll work on my cut and paste! When you hear an answer for my more than three word query please copy me!

Lee R. Berger 10:36, 7 September 2007 (CDT)

You got it! Will do. --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:45, 7 September 2007 (CDT)