Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:35, 20 September 2013

Howdy human! :  }

Seems you've found my talk page.
Feel free to leave comments, questions, musings, and messages of most any sort.
If you feel you have something to add/interject to existing or ongoing entries that's 'ok' by me as well.

--Kevjonesin (talk) 16:20, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

A Wiki Proem, or A Pinch of Purple Proetry

I stumbled crossing a bridge one day and thought to fill in the gap on which I'd tripped so as to make the way easier for those yet to come this way. Little did I know that lurking below was one who seemed to lay claim to the King's highway merely for having labored in it's construction. As if that which was offered freely as service to the realm was now to serve as title to a common path. Ah, alas alack, the many ways in which a kindly gesture can become arduous tedium when the well intentioned are forced to stop and pay the troll. :  }

p.s. — "Wo-oah, what I want to know..."

p.p.s. — This also covers it.

--Kevjonesin (talk) 02:19, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Beware! This user is a known talk page stalker.

File:Dont panic.svg

Welcome!

Hello, Kevjonesin, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction to Misplaced Pages
• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on ], or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Thanks for the links and the encouragement. : }

Happy Walpurgisnacht!

Today is Walpurgis Night.

"Walpurgis Night (Walpurgisnacht) is a traditional spring festival on 30 April or 1 May in large parts of Central and Northern Europe. It is often celebrated with dancing and with bonfires. It is exactly six months from All Hallows' Eve."

--Kevjonesin (talk) 15:36, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Happy May Day!

It's 1 May so it's May Day. Yea! :  }

"May Day on May 1 is an ancient Northern Hemisphere spring festival and usually a public holiday; it is also a traditional spring holiday in many cultures."

--Kevjonesin (talk) 14:31, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

WhisperBacks (& other notifications)

You have a new message at Odysseus1479's talk page. And the same to you, with Beltane blessings! —Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

You have a new message at Odysseus1479's talk page.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 04:01, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

You have a new message at Odysseus1479's talk page.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 19:09, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

RE: Hoshen

The fact that it is the "largest organization in Israel" with three references establishes notability. But it needs to be expanded, if possible. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 22:32, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

• I noticed you were giving the page a bit of TLC. Thank you. If you know anyone who'd care to expand it further please pass it on. Other projects are holding my interest. --Kevjonesin (talk) 22:44, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Sanaullah Haq

Hello Kevjonesin! I saw that you did your valuable comment on Articles for deletion/Sanaullah Haq. Despite comparison with the article of Sarabjit Singh, does not the article of Sanaullah Haq returned 0.2 million results? This decides the article to be notable! I know my articles are becoming target of an enmity here, but will continue my work. Just asking you for a review, the article is notable, and documents a current event, and further developments may render the article as notable. Thanking, Faizan -Let's talk! 08:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Faizan -Let's talk! 09:58, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Userpages

Go read the section before yours. DS (talk) 21:55, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

-- ТимофейЛееСуда. 02:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to ImageMagick may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:08, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks BracketBot! :  } --Kevjonesin (talk) 14:24, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikigraphist_abilities

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Resources/Wikigraphist_abilities

Salvage

Template:Quantity/sandbox is up for speedy. I don't care but you may want to salvage some of it to paste to the other templates we referred to.--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:37, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Canoe1967. I will check it out. Will likely just copy it to my own user space en masse. --Kevjonesin (talk) 00:12, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

After copying/archiving stuff under a "User:Kevjonesin/" prefix I looked into the rationale for the 'speedy' in the first place. It's based on confusion over a "Template:Quantity" page which was deleted in 2005. I'll go ahead and remove the 'speedy', {{db-g8}}, and leave a note on the talk page. This serves as a reminder of pending projects for me. I've had a few of those recently. :  } --Kevjonesin (talk) 00:48, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Werieth (talk) 22:01, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Complexity creep in the name of organization

This went from a long mess, to a neat and tidy folded up bit... and is creeping back into a long mess again. Nothing kills neat and simple like trying too hard to be organized ;-) Just a thought. No need to reply... unless it's to praise my profound wisdom and let me know the request has been reverted to the much simpler and slightly less organized single collapse. Of course, if you feel it should stay as it is, I understand. One man's profound wisdom is another man's "good suggestion, but I'm still gonna do it my way...". – JBarta (talk) 04:45, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi JBarta, Let me explain... no, there is no time. Let me sum up...

At heart, it was a matter of functionality. The single collapse format broke the ToC (Table of Contents) links.

Also, another influence was that it is an extraordinarily long thread and I found it convenient to have the option to open only the sections(s) I wanted to interact with.

While perhaps not as sleek as it was with a single collapse, it's still takes up less page space than many other threads have. Thanks for turning me on to the collapse option. I hadn't learned that markup trick yet. --Kevjonesin (talk) 13:09, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Returns fist bump!

I'm glad someone caught on that I was being sarcastic. I often find that sarcasm is completely lost upon those who most need to recognize it. El3ctr1csheepz (talk) 03:35, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I've got a growing suspicion... it seems to me that Aspberger's/Autism spectrum dynamics run high amongst this community.

Not so surprising if one considers that the wiki is rooted in fairly early web culture and has traditionally required editors to use a form of mark-up language. Tech head communities often include a high percentage of folks who find reading and responding to social cues to be a challenge —if they are even able to recognize that such exist.

I've been thinking upon this a fair bit lately, and am arriving at another suspicion. I think that the wiki has been systemically set up to favor such personalities. Not saying intentionally so, but more in a like-breeds-like fashion. The strong argumentative analytical sharp element has crowded out much of the round-cornered warm fuzzy types and much in between.

I think that this ties in to the low percentage of women involved as active editors. It's simply not a comfy place for most ladies. I recall a discussion amongst roommates in a shared house where it came down to "If we're not going to clean-up more for ourselves, can we at least aspire to create a space where women would be willing to hang out?"

I think the lack of more casual chat environments figures in to all this. Women like to chat. As do many men. And it helps to foster spontaneous creativity. I'm thinking every page would benefit from having a chat board in addition to the formal talk/article_discussion page. Not only allow general conversation about the topic of a page but encourage it. In a separate space from the focused discussions related to implementing content.

I recall reading about how a big company (I think it was Microsoft) at one point replaced all the small cabaret tables in their lunchroom with big long institutional cafeteria benches. Inter-departmental collaboration increased exponentially afterwards.

I feel that systematically encouraging more casual communication would lead to spontaneous improvements to content, fresh links and references arising, editors getting inspired to edit, and a general opportunity to build camaraderie. The present strictures in place seem to —sadly— better encourage/allow_for cold militant bureaucratic authoritarian attitudes than for congenial considerate friendly relationships.

Seems more breakrooms would encourage editors to take more breaks and meet/get-to-know more fellow editors. Many of us tend to be a bit obsessive. I think we need to give thought to incorporating ways to help folks bring themselves down from the clouds and expand their tunnel vision from time to time. IMHO :  }

--Kevjonesin (talk) 14:39, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:AUTIE --Kevjonesin (talk) 04:11, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

An aside...

Patrick87, Have you heard the one about the hoarder and the janitor?

>wink<

--Kevjonesin (talk) 02:57, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I do not understand. --Patrick87 (talk) 03:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

hoarder=Penyulap, janitor= Patrick87

She wants to hold on to everything indefinitely and you were just trying to clean up.

Made me envision a man with a broom and dust pan being confronted by a persistent hoarder. Which struck me as a funny way to sum up things.

By the way, User:Penyulap is blocked indefinitely here on en:Misplaced Pages.

--Kevjonesin (talk) 03:26, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for explanation. Don't know if i should laugh or cry though.

I noticed the block before and I'm afraid it didn't really surprise me. Good night, --Patrick87 (talk) 03:41, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Inappropriate

This was rather inappropriate and unexpected from you. However, I'm sure you've noted that you're now permanently asked to remain off their talkpage - I'm not sure if you consider such to be a successful Friday or not (✉→BWilkins←✎) 19:15, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

• "I'm sure you've noted that you're now permanently asked to remain off their talkpage"

I have not noted such as I've received no such request. ?

Unless you refer to the edit summary on the diff I linked. I took that to refer to weighing in on comment threads started by others (i.e. {{talk page stalker}}) as TonyTheTiger's #Okay Hot-Shot, Okay! source images was the context to which the summary was attached. Werieth and I also had a previous ongoing thread active at the time so it didn't seem to be a global statement. If it had been meant so I assume he would have communicated such explicitly either on our ongoing thread on his talk-page or in a comment posted to my talk-page.

Ah! I think I may have found what prompted your statement, Bwilkins. When I just edit 'previewed' this thread the "#Okay Hot-Shot, Okay! source images" link failed (it's been recently bot archived and I'd originally tried wikilinking directly). In sorting that out I came across this. Though not explicitly stated per se, yes, I would surmise from the context that the edit summary was meant as a statement/request aimed at me. Hmm, I could swear I've read guidelines which explicitly mention that trying to convey such personal messages through glib edit summaries is poor form and that talk-pages are considered a much more appropriate —and effective— venue.

As to "inappropriate and unexpected from you", well, one's certainly entitled to their opinions. I do actually take the "unexpected" bit as a fairly high complement. Thank you. It implies you've taken the time to look into my general patterns a bit. Did you do the same for Werieth (look into his general patterns a bit)?

I have.

It seems to me that in his self chosen role as an 'enforcer' of policy he's left quite a trail of ruffled feathers —some of them simply butthurt while others seem quite justifiably so ruffled. So I found it quite appropriate to call him out on having —apparently— been evasive. Especially as it seemed to me that core issues of context and consideration —a possible source of much of the ruffling— were the very topics he most wishes to evade.

Bwilkins, I encourage you to continue taking interest and to look into things further. Perhaps someone with diplomatic skills/awareness would be willing to mentor Werieth a bit? Communicating with him seems to have exceeded the limits of my skills at such.

Thanks for taking an interest, Bwilkins.

--Kevjonesin (talk) 21:43, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

• Ah, Bwilkins, I see via #Bwilkins block of PumpkinSky that you're having your own issues with 'appropriateness'. It really doesn't paint a pretty picture. Leads me to question what your relationship is with Werieth and how you came to comment here in the first place. Sigh... --Kevjonesin (talk) 14:51, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

After reading a bit more in detail I see that the 'kerfluffle' surrounding you may not have been as cut-n-dry as originally presented. Still, it does serve to show that Werieth and I weren't the only ones feeling 'pissy' yesterday. Perhaps something was in-the-air, so to speak.

Hope this day blesses the wiki with warm fuzzies and a good dose of considerate common sense. --Kevjonesin (talk) 15:17, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

p.s.— Bwilkins, yesterday was Thursday. >wink< --Kevjonesin (talk) 16:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Im just going to drop a little note here. The reason I ended the discussion with you is it seems you lack finesse and tact when having a discussion. I cannot describe how you approach appeared to me as it would be considered a violation of NPA. I have made it a point to disengage to avoid a slip of my tongue which would get me in hot water. You dont seem to understand the point at which you become unhelpful in a discussion. With regards to Bwilkins comment about Friday, you might want to review time zones and UTC. Depending on where one is there can be a major variance in the time/date. Bwilkins and I have little interaction so be careful what kind of implications you sling around. Werieth (talk) 17:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

LOL >snort< :  }

Werieth 'asks' me not to post on his talk-page anymore and then proceeds to drop a 'stalker' comment on mine. Classy, Werieth, classy. Might wanna' check your hair:

p.s.— Good point about time zones in general —not sure how likely it is to apply in this case. But plausible. IMHO, not really what's implied by the wording though.

--Kevjonesin (talk) 18:21, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

—Avenue X at Cicero (t · c) sends his regards @ 11:33, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Cleaning up the Graphics Lab

Hi Kevin, I was wondering if you (or anyone else) might want to help me clean up the Graphics Lab? It seems to me that there are lots of problems with the current one, one of which is that it's extremely difficult to edit; There are far too many templates and subtemplates that make up the 4 main pages, such that even correcting a simple spelling error can send you on a wild goose chase to find out which page to edit. So.. I've started a mirror of the Graphics Lab in my userspace, and so far I've only conceded a single template. I've been copying text/links over with the intention of simplifying page construction. My aim so far is to create 4 main pages (Graphics Lab, Illustration workshop, Photography workshop and Map workshop) featuring as few, easy-to-edit templates as possible (so far just a simple sidebar). I think a lot of crud has built up over time that would be better removed. There are a lot of redundant elements and the non-Wikilike layout, I suspect, makes the Graphic Lab a bit of a weird place for people to wander into. Which is why, so far, I've gone for a simple layout that's similar to what you might find anywhere else on Misplaced Pages.

We might also take the opportunity to collate the 'rules of the graphics lab' that currently exist, such that they are, into one place for easy reference. If you can help me identify all of the subpages that ought to be linked in, or transcribed, to the new pages I'd very much appreciate it. I know that you have lots of energy and enthusiasm, so I thought you'd be the ideal person to approach first. Once we've got the ball rolling it will be much easier for others to contribute, and eventually if everyone's happy perhaps we can copy the new lab over the old one. What say you? Kind regards, nagualdesign (talk) 13:27, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

"correcting a simple spelling error can send you on a wild goose chase to find out which page to edit." —Amen :  }

Here's what has been helping me to get a leg up on the goose: Graphics Lab pages with prefix (Template namespace)

"I think a lot of crud has built up over time" —I tend to agree. But perhaps not in such strong terms. I think I'd prefer 'excess' & 'streamlined' to "crud" & "removed" but I get your point.

Personally, I kinda' like that the lab has a "non-Wikilike layout". It's a different sort of environment from most other parts of the wiki. Let's Toto know that he's no longer in Kansas —so to speak. That said, I am willing to entertain new ideas. It is presently "a bit of a weird place for people to wander into". Quite a bit of stuff slapped together at the top of the page. Lots of room for streamlining I suppose. Collapsing some bits and/or linking detailed info from keywords and brief summaries might help. It's all a bit overwhelming as is. Tries to address graphists and requesters kinda' simultaneously.

Collaboration sounds cool. Advance to a alpha/beta stage and then seek broader input is a good idea. Better chance of getting a horse built instead just a camel designed by committee. The first BBS was created by two guys from a computer club who consciously chose such an approach. One of them had made the realization that a small team could get something done and implemented whereas the larger computer club would likely just discuss the idea ad nauseum.

Humorous (& practical) side note: The duck technique... (3rd bullet point)

Thanks for thinking of me Nagual. Your scheme fits well with things I've been trying to do on-&-off in bits-n-pieces. I've been making some similar efforts on Commons as well. Hmm... that introduces an idea of perhaps giving consideration to some cross site coordination designed in. The formats are currently similar. I've given thought to porting our "Tagged/Eight requests" display format to Commons. Something to consider; however, I remind myself to keep the concepts of 'mission creep' and 'feature bloat' in mind as well.

Anyway, yes, collab sounds good. A nice change of pace. --Kevjonesin (talk) 14:18, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

p.s.— The new "VisualEditor" may need to be taken into consideration. Have you tried it yet? I've not. --Kevjonesin (talk) 14:53, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the All pages with prefix link. I thought something like that must be available but I hadn't found it. Here's some proposals (random thoughts, mostly):

• This discussion should be moved to User talk:Nagualdesign/Graphics lab
• Start with a simple, text-only layout and leave the bells and whistles until later
• Copy/paste all of the relevant content from the 'prefix' pages to the 4 main workshop pages, then trim down/templatize (sparingly!) later
• Wikify everything, apply the MoS properly, simplify editability
• The standard ToCs (ie, the arrangement of sections and subsections) should be structured in a way that visitors, be they requesters or graphists, can find the section that relates to them, quickly and easily
• There really is some crud in the current system. Several links are broken or redundant, and some sections haven't been used in a long while
• I had another idea but I'm having trouble putting it into words, so I'm just going to do it now...

Regards, Joe

nagualdesign (talk) 23:29, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

:  } --Kevjonesin (talk) 14:08, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

WP:TOPPOST

Your comment needs to go in chronological order, that's why it was reverted. Your comment was the latest one, so it goes at the bottom, where people expect newer comments. It doesn't go on the top because editors aren't going to look for new comments at the top and it will get overlooked. - Aoidh (talk) 03:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC)