User talk:DarTar

1) Welcome. For more information on categories, refer to Category, Categorization, and Categorisation FAQ. Of course, one page can belong to many categories, but the more it belongs to the less meaningful each one is. Karol 17:17, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks!

2) I know that this institute is interdisciplinary and covers a very wide range of topics. That is not a reason, however, to place it in Category:Philosophy. There is a certain category hierarchy, and the top-level Category:Philosophy should contain pages directly related to or about philosophy. Take a look what kind of pages are there - mostly about philosophy in general and "meta" pages. The category was recently depopulated, after having ca. 500 pages, which made it incomprehensible. If each topic related to philosophy were to be placed there, we would be back to the same situation. That is why I removed those categories, and why I will insist on removing them again. Karol 17:17, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see, I'll try to find something more specific (basically all philosophers at IJN work in the field of philosophy of mind or language]]).

3) Á propos the examples. MIT_AI_Lab was categorized in Category:Artificial intelligence due to the lack of a more specific category. I now created Category:Artificial intelligence laboratories to illustrate the point, and therefore it can be recategorized. In any case, Artificial intelligence as a category is alot further down the hierarchy than philosophy and has a norrower subject field, and thus has a lower propensity to grow. Due to this, a wider variety of page types can be left there. The same argumentation applies, to a lesser degree, to Category:Cognitive science. Karol 17:17, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4) Why is Category:Education in Paris not OK for this page? Karol 17:17, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the institute is mainly a research lab. It hosts master students, graduate students and postdocs but doesn't deliver any degree.

5) Consider placing the page in Category:Interdisciplinary fields or one of its subcategories. Also consider making a new category, for instace Category:Interdisciplinary research isntitutes. Karol 17:17, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe a category for research institutes in cognitive science, which sounds much more specific.

Thanks for your feedback,

--DarTar

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Ehess.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- Longhair 10:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am not sure the source formatting will be decided any time soon on that page. In the meantime I added back a wiki-link you added a few days ago. The one that wasn't duplicating other wikilinks in that section: MySQL. I am sorry for any hassles I caused by my removing the wikilinks you added. Feel free to edit the page. --Timeshifter 19:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion on whether this article meets the inclusion criteria is welcome. Please contribute to the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/28 August 2007 lunar eclipse. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them.

Discussions such as these usually last five days. In the meantime, you are free to edit the content of the article. Please do not remove the "articles for deletion" template (the box at the top). When the discussion has concluded, a neutral third party will consider all comments and decide whether or not to delete the article. Peter G Werner 22:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Voted, thanks. --DarTar 15:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Barbican-logo.gif. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Added reference to the source of the logo (and copyright owner), thanks --DarTar 14:39, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:XeTeX logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

Added explanation and fair use rationale --DarTar 17:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(from user talk:jacobolus)

Hi, I'm just very curious to know which program you used for the SVG version of LaTeX output.-PhDP ^(talk) 19:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same here, I'm on Mac OS and I'm struggling to find a good (possibly opensource) solution to convert PDF/EPS to SVG. --DarTar 12:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry. I left the following at PhDP's talk page:

I actually used pdflatex to make a pdf, and then used Adobe Illustrator to turn characters into outlines. This is undoubtedly possible with apps like Inkscape, etc., which are free, but I have more experience with Illustrator. :) --jacobolus (t) 22:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making a map of Smithfield market. It looks like there is aerial photograph in the background. I assume that this is from a copyrighted source, meaning it can't be used on Wikipedia. You might want to take a look at OpenStreetMap for a map released under a free license. Edward 23:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Background removed, thanks. --DarTar 13:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article Smithfield, London you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Smithfield, London for things needed to be addressed. The main issues are that the lead section needs to be expanded, and some more references need to be added as addressed in the notes I left. It's very close, but based on the work you've put into the article recently, I'm sure you'll be able to finish it up. Good luck! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 08:49, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear that. Is there anyone else who you could get to work on the article? You've still got a few days to make the changes. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I'm afraid there's no one else regularly working on the article. --DarTar (talk) 20:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just discovered XeTex (via Slashdot) today and am presently writing a stub fr:XeTeX. I Can not use your nice examples as the images are on en.wikipedia.org. Could you please put them on 'commons' so I can use them too? (Help:Moving_to_commons). Thank you! -- Xofc (talk) 09:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, apparently someone already did it :) --DarTar (talk) 09:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops sorry, that's the wrong image! I'll move the sample output to Commons as well --DarTar (talk) 09:51, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

done --DarTar (talk) 10:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! (I put them in the 'TeX' category (and will reference 'commons' in en:XeTeX & de:XeTeX, so it will be easier for the next translator to find them)). ...I also need Image:XeTeX logo.png (in .svg if possible). -- Xofc (talk) 13:01, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a SVG version of the logo in the German Wikipedia. Maybe you can ask them to move it to commons as well? --DarTar (talk) 08:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! The article now meets all criteria for a Good Article and has passed its review! I've left some comments on the talk page for you so you can continue to work on this article and get it towards FA status. I'd also recommend a peer review of the article, not only to get some more suggestions for further improvement, but also to attract some more attention for the article. I could see that virtually all of this work was done by you, which is excellent, but I'm sure you could still use some help. Again, well done, and keep up the good work! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:19, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you may have seen, after your request I did a lot of work all over the article (including new sections 4.2 and 7). Now we should reorganize the section you were working on, which is really messy. Now:

1) How do you like the status of the rest of the paper? Please forward any constructive criticism.

2)The main difficulty I have with the final section is that some information is hearsay (a kind of information not admitted in courts, at least in USA), which I feel also WIKIPEDIA should omit. Also, an historian is not a reputable source on legal matters. Could you help me further in getting stronger quotes? Could you at least quote a sentence of Scalfaro in the notes?

By  Pinea (talk) 22:50, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

It is hearsay because of the way it is quoted. You are not quoting his text but somebody else who quotes him. The problem is not the unlikeliky case that the quotation could be wrong but the lack of context in the reference you provide. If you quote the original source, a willing reader could read all the page and better understand the meaning of the sentence and the motivations leading to such a strong statement. Bye Pinea (talk) 14:34, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ya. No problem. my prose can always do with polishing, as it remains less than golden. One point, in headings "The" - and normally the placename - are verboten; according to WP:MOSHEAD. I've been trying to work up the courage to deal with that redirect to "The Market" - it needs to be changed, or will not get through the FA process. As to the rest, the content really is largely there. It could be expanded to the n-th degree; but that loses conciseness. I don't believe the point of the 'comprehensive coverage' clause of the FAR process is intended to repeat stuff better rehearsed under other articles. Charterhouse - for example - is in neighbouring LB Islington; so, not Smithfield then. But they asked for religious houses, and got them! Now, I expect - later in the process - someone is going to ask for them to be removed! Welcome to FA! Kbthompson (talk) 23:35, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, overnight it's been closed as not promoted. I would suggest continuing to address the various concerns that people brought up in the process - and to resubmit in three-four weeks. I'm sorry. Kbthompson (talk) 09:01, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:XeTeX logo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You recently reverted two separate items of vandalism by the same chump. You obviously need WP:Rollback, it is therefore granted .... should this be unwanted, do let me know. Please read the packet, and use it wisely. Kbthompson (talk) 22:03, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers --DarTar (talk) 10:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

è stato un piacere--The White Duke (talk) 14:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Io insisto...tanto basta fare rollback, anzi se vedi che lo fa ancora e io non me ne accorgo segnalamelo e intervengo, ho anche fatto chiarezza nella pagina di discussione cmq se la cosa va avanti puoi chiedere un blocco della pagina o dell'utente? --The White Duke (talk) 05:24, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Puoi chiedere la semiprotezione per quella pagina? io non parlo bene inglese quindi non saprei come rivolgermi ad un'amministratore...in questo modo visto che il vandalo non è un utente registrato non potrà più cercare di imporre il suo punto di vista (tra le altre cose ha cominciato a esprimersi in modo sconveniente)...grazie ciao --The White Duke (talk) 17:12, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Corriere frontpage.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:55, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, DarTar. Per your suggestion, I updated the entry on the European Review of Philosophy. I created a redirect for European Review of Philosophy to the new entry Review of Philosophy and Psychology. And I made the relevant changes to the List of philosophy journals. I also made some changes to the RPP entry. I removed the details about the editorial board and all that because I thought it was a bit much. Feel free to update it with other new information. - Jaymay (talk) 23:44, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated WikiPing, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WikiPing. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Pcap ping 18:12, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

you don't know me, but I just wanted to thank you for all you do to help wikipedia--RIVER^{Babble at my brooks} 20:56, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

can u please provide me some developers of the wiki project. Coz i have found a bug in the beta version of our local wiki. Thanks in advance

--Glacious (talk) 13:36, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DarTar, I notice that you have the "researcher" user privilege. As my user-page demonstrates, I do academic research on Wikipedia and would be interested in obtaining this right -- how did you obtain it? Thanks, West.andrew.g (talk) 02:31, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grazie della segnalazione, appena possibile guarderò meglio la voce inglese. Come forse hai notato, comunque, gran parte delle informazioni sono state raccolte su it:Famiglia Graviano. Tuttora sono incerto se lasciare la voce per i singoli componenti. Ciao! --Wolland (talk) 12:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ciao DarTar, in realtà la mia non era una correzione, solo un errore che devo evidentemente aver fatto mentre scrivevo... scusa ma purtroppo non me ne ero accorto, altrimenti avrei rimediato io stesso! --Luca P (talk) 18:26, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, many articles to which I contribute are formerly deleted for various reasons. Although it would be wonderful to gain adminship, I don't wish to carry the full-time responsibility, nor do I likely meet all the requirements. Either way, I stumbled upon researcher and I noticed that it allows you to see deleted pages? This would be wonderful, because more times than not the deleted content provides some usefulness in rebuilding the page. I also noticed that you are apparently the only user on en. that has this ability, where can I go to request for this?
Or, is researcher used for something entirely different? Let me know, please. - Theornamentalist (talk) 14:56, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I've seen you are the (only!) researcher (see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&group=researcher ). Wow! Like Theornamentalist and West.andrew.g I would like to know how you can get the flag. Thanks! --phauly (talk) 10:26, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening! This is a friendly message from Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry, inviting you to the London Wikimedia Fundraising party on 19th December 2010, in approximately one week. This party is being held at an artistic London venue with room for approximately 300 people, and is being funded by Ed Saperia, a non-Wikipedian who has a reputation for holding exclusive events all over London. This year, he wants to help Wikipedia, and is subsidising a charity event for us. We're keen to get as many Wikimedians coming as possible, and we already have approximately 200 guests, including members of the press, and some mystery guests! More details can be found at http://ten.wikipedia.org/wiki/London - expect an Eigenharp, a mulled wine hot tub, a free hog roast, a haybale amphitheatre and more. If you're interested in coming - and we'd love to have you - please go to the ten.wikipedia page and follow the link to the Facebook event. Signing up on Facebook will add you to the party guestlist. Entry fee is a heavily subsidised £5 and entry is restricted to over 18s. It promises to be a 10th birthday party to remember! If you have any questions, please email me at chasemewiki at gmail.com.

Hope we'll see you there, (and apologies for the talk page spam) - Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 22:15, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For our first official recruitment drive! Starting on Wednesday the 9th of February at 12:30pm. We would love to have you!

All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 16:46, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Schwede66 and Pigsonthewing! —DarTar (talk) 14:19, 30 March 2020 (UTC) DarTar (talk) 14:19, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This email discussion thread may be of interest. Shyamal (talk) 04:52, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am just wondering why is it that you are the only researcher. How did you get that flag on your account. Please respond on my talk page. Gabesta449 ^{edits ♦ chat} 03:06, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noted with interest your study of academic participation on Wikipedia. There has recently been a substantial outreach effort to the cultural sector and you may find aspects of that model useful, especially some of the guidance that I helped to develop. —UncleDouggie (talk) 00:02, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will u be able to make it July 30th to taste those yourself? :) Samer.hc (talk) 18:00, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing! Feel free to ping me here when you have some edits you want me to review. DarTar (talk) 13:29, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just 'cause.

Jorm (WMF) (talk) 17:14, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may not have noticed my reply at User talk:UOJComm#Your survey, yet the issue is important so I will restate the situation here.

I asked UOJComm whether there was a clear statement that their user name is approved to deliver multiple emails and talk page requests to promote a survey. You gave a response that was fine in itself, but which did not address the point of my concern.

Merely having the Research Committee announce that "Project Xyz is approved" is a security nightmare. Consider the following scenario. A scammer named Eve uses "email this user" to send survey invitations to 1000 editors. The email uses convincing language (similar to the genuine Xyz) to announce that Eve is conducting a survey for project Xyz, with a link to where it is approved. Another link invites the reader to "click here" to start the survey and help Wikipedia! The "click here" link is a website operated by Eve which can do a variety of bad things (possibly different things for different users). The website would start with encouraging and plausible text and some simple questions (copied from the real Xyz survey), and would lull the editor into a false sense of security. Simple attacks include harvesting the IP address of targeted editors, or getting a significant percentage of them to reveal their email address. For an example of a slightly more complex attack, consider the ongoing drama concerning the theft and publication of (apparently) the entire archive of ArbCom's private mailing list (see WT:Arbitration Committee for ongoing discussion which started in archive 8). With a bit of trouble and social engineeering, Eve could determine that some respondents are admins, and target them with malware to harvest passwords.

What should occur is that a special bot account be established, and only that account used to deliver messages. The message should provide a link to a page on a WMF site with "how to respond" details. Particularly in view of the ArbCom fiasco mentioned above, my brief outline of what could go wrong with survey spam should be followed up with professional assistance from a security expert to sign off on whatever scheme is adopted. Johnuniq (talk) 11:20, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

can this be used with the English Wikipedia, with an oral history I took? NickDupree (talk) 21:26, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Thank you for the mistakes' correction in the page: Wikimedia Foundation Highlights, September 2011/it. Raoli (talk) 23:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Xetex sample.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:19, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm just checking in to ask how the analysis of the NPP survey is coming along. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:15, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Kudpung, I think Ironholds has something ready-ish to publish on Meta. --DarTar (talk) 22:42, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. He hasn't consulted with me and I've heard nothing for from him for a while. Please send me the data you have prepared. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:41, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chop, chop! Hup, hup!

Hi,

The central notice currently running - http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CentralNotice&method=listNoticeDetail&notice=Harvard+Sciences+Po - appears to be an advert for two non-wikimedia organizations. Can it be taken down please? Thanks --Fæ (talk) 23:23, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Research Works Act, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Research Works Act proposed in the U.S. House of Representatives would ban open access mandates for federally funded research? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Research Works Act.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:09, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This means you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries ... I love copyediting the Signpost! Graham87 02:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for signing onto WikiProject Open Access. A colleague of mine who went to Science Online mentioned a Wikipedian presenter but I just realized after seeing your slides that this must be you. Siko told me that I should meet you sometime also. Can I talk to you by phone / Skype / Hangout soon? I really want to know how you got your ideas for your slides - I have heard some other people suggest what you are suggesting but I am missing some information to put it all together and I think if I talked to you then you could quickly direct me to what I need to read. Also - some of what you propose... nevermind, I do not want to start asking questions here. Can I make an appointment with you? Blue Rasberry (talk) 05:37, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://toolserver.org/~dartar/aft5/stream/?c= shows a bunch of unexpected JavaScript wanting to run, including affiliatecashsniper and bravotube, but there's so much HTML that my browser is barfing on bringing it up for searching the raw HTML for these links; what I have looked for hasn't shown links. Do you have any idea where these script links are coming from? 110.174.86.241 (talk) 12:42, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is coming from javascript embedded in spammy feedback posts. Thanks for reporting this, I am taking down my script with the stream until the CSVs are entirely sanitized. --DarTar (talk) 17:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For tirelessly and boldly supporting the cause of Wikipedia research as a means of contributing to the project and coming up with new ideas, I award you this Barnstar. Keep up the amazing work! SalimJah (talk) 15:09, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	to all of the contributors to the April 30, 2012 Recent Research report in the Signpost for the good work there! Pine(talk) 07:52, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• Account activation codes have been emailed.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 04:41, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 June 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Access2Research, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Access2Research is petitioning U.S. President Obama to issue an open-access mandate for publicly funded research? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Access2Research.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind remarks and the barnstar. As to your initiative to TFA the article on Paolo Borsellino, I agree that the sad 20-year anniversary of his murder would be a good moment. This has crossed my mind also and I tried to improve the article but got stuck and was sidetracked by other issues. The problem is that it is a complicated issue. We certainly should expand the article with sections on the series of trials about his murder and the alleged pact(s) between the factions in the Mafia and sectors of the State, but everything around that is still uncertain, speculative and volatile. On top of that I have very little time to take on such a major task before July 19, due to busy obligations in real life. The only thing I really can do at the moment is help reviewing what others can add (I would suggest also to incorporate some stuff from the Rita Atria article). I am sorry but I don't want to raise expectations I cannot fulfill. I am certainly interested to improve the article to a GA or even FA status later on. Borsellino (and Falcone for that matter) certainly deserves that. - DonCalo (talk) 23:45, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, after all, I did include a section on the mysteries surrounding Borsellino murder. Let me know what you think. - DonCalo (talk) 18:40, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree a better heading might be useful. As to the image of Borsellino, I changed the licensing as it now is in the public domain in Italy, since photographs are only protected for a period of 20 years from creation. It is safe to assume that is already the case since we are one week from his assassination. - DonCalo (talk) 23:31, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ciao, sono Emanuele, un utente principalmente di wikiquote in italiano. Mi occorrerebbe sapere se e come fosse possibile ottenere delle statistiche personalizzate relativamente ad uno specifico servizio di Wikimedia.

Su wikiquote in italiano abbiamo inventato un nuovo tipo di template dedicato a dare il benvenuto ai nuovi utenti del wiki. Indipendentemente da quello che si può aspettare sul it.wikiquote c'è un utente che si dedica ad aggiungere tale template (link) nelle pagine degli utenti appena iscritti. Il nostro obiettivo è quello di far aumentare gli edit da parte dei nuovi utenti, pertanto propongo un periodo di 6 mesi per valutare realmente se con questo nuovo template farà aumentare gli edit sul wiki oppure no. Per questo motivo occorrerebbero delle statistiche in merito che dicano se in un arco di tempo ben definito i nuovi utenti, appena iscritti, hanno editato o sono rimasti solo registrati senza fare alcun edit. é questa l'unica statistica che serve.

Ho visto che tu ti occupi di cose di questo genere da qui m:Research:WMF technical support. Ma preferisco parlarne prima. Non so se il progetto è fattibile, ma si tratterebbe di una piccola cosa in confronto ad altri progetti che ho visto. Ti ringrazio per una gentile risposta. Raoli (talk) 16:42, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dati gli incoraggiantissimi dati provenienti dalle statistiche, ti vorrei chiedere se è possibile utilizzare la funzione Feedback post-edit anche su it.wikiquote. Se mi sono spiegato male intendo la funzione che il tuo collega Steven ha spiegato qui. Su it.wikiquote ce ne avremo molto bisogno. Ciao Dario Raoli (talk) 23:17, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DarTar, nice work on the Signpost this month. Thank you! Tony (talk) 10:15, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dario, here is what I have just been posting to members of the WikiProject.

---

it is now one year since WikiProject Open Access was started by User:Bluerasberry on January 10, 2012. Since then, the project has advanced modestly, but we have not interacted much. For the coming year, we certainly want to improve on that.

We also plan to overhaul the project pages to make them more conducive to collaboration, and we are pondering the idea of expanding the concept of a WikiProject Open Access to projects other than the English Wikipedia, e.g. to other languages or to Wikimedia Commons. You are warmly invited to add your voice to all that. We would also appreciate if you would share some of your OA-related activities by way of our news ticker or via the monthly Open Access report that is part of the GLAM newsletter (to which you can subscribe here), or as you see fit otherwise.

As a visual token of the anniversary, I am adding today's Open Access File of the Day. Feel free to nominate files yourself. As of today, commons:Category:Open access (publishing) contains more than 15,000 files, of which about 2/3 are video and sound files uploaded by the Open Access Media Importer.

Thanks for being part of the project, and looking forward to more interaction.

---

With a smile, -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 00:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dario. I hope this finds you well. I just wanted to let you know that I emailed you yesterday regarding instructions on RCom review for a continuation of my bot project. Please let me know the best way to communicate on this. Thanks!

Randall UOJComm (talk) 15:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dario,

Amir left a message at the Hebrew Wikipedia that you might be looking for additional contributors to the Wikimedia Research Newsletter. If so, I'll gladly help. Best, ליאור • Lior (talk) 10:24, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• me too, I would like to try one of April's articles. Setreset (talk) 10:32, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, help is welcome! There is information on how to contribute at m:Research:Newsletter. The Etherpad linked there already contains a pretty long list of items to cover in the April issue. Even brief summaries (2-3 sentences) are useful. Regards, Tbayer (WMF) (talk) 14:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We love you,very much,Victor Cole!!!

MommyMisty10 (talk) 15:31, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Article Feedback 5 Additional Articles, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Sandstein  10:57, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rim Fire (2013), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Alameda and San Mateo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

New Montgomery Street (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Rialto Building

Rim Fire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Pinecrest, California

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Would it be possible to load some fresh data into the graphs at http://toolserver.org/~dartar/fr/aft5/ and https://toolserver.org/~dartar/fr/fp/ ?

This would be great !

NB: no need for daily update.

Klipe (talk) 15:42, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Klipe, these graphs are deprecated, the new ones can be found here. Hope this helps. DarTar (talk) 15:45, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect ! Thanks a lot, Klipe (talk) 22:34, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:37, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Colby Fire has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Minor fire, all things considered. Never likely to be larger than a stub.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:28, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to explain why I've PROD'ed the Colby Fire article. There are literally hundreds of wildfires in California every year, and not all of them are encyclopedic. In the grand scheme of things, the Colby Fire is a relatively minor incident and it's not ever likely to be expandable beyond stub status. I'm fairly certain it won't have the lasting impact or coverage that's required to take something from a news article to an encyclopedic subject (as was the case with, say, the Rim Fire. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:35, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

Thank you for working on this graph for Portuguese Wikibooks! Helder.wiki 15:52, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I initially created it as a redirect, but the more I read about him the more it seemed like he was notable and deserved his own article. GiantSnowman 07:38, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, half a year ago, you expressed interest in my WikiProject Cleanup Listing and its migration to Tool Labs. I thought you might want to hear an update about this: The migration (and a rewrite) was now done by Bamyers99 and it's available at http://tools.wmflabs.org/bambots/cwb/index.html. User<Svick>.Talk(); 15:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Zorglub27. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, 2014 Napa earthquake, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Zorglub27 (talk) 15:28, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick thanks for creating the article. There will be many occasions to link to it in my work. Cheers, Dawnseeker2000 01:18, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Dawnseeker2000: you're welcome. Thanks for creating the redlink. --DarTar (talk) 01:48, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article December 2014 West Coast storm is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/December 2014 West Coast storm until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tchaliburton (talk) 03:20, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited December 2014 West Coast storm, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sierra Nevada and Berkeley. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Republican marches, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prime Minister of Ireland. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

After a delay in updates to the Structured data on Commons project, I wanted to catch you up with what has been going on over the past three months. In short: The project is on hold, but that doesn't mean nothing is happening.

The meeting in Berlin in October provided the engineering teams with a lot to start on. Unfortunately the Structured Data on Commons project was put on hold not too long after this meeting. Development of the actual Structured data system for Commons will not begin until more resources can be allocated to it.

The Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia Germany have been working to improve the Wikidata query process on the back-end. This is designed to be a production-grade replacement of WikidataQuery integrated with search. The full project is described at Mediawiki.org.This will benefit the structured data project greatly since developing a high-level search for Commons is a desired goal of this project.

The Wikidata development team is working on the arbitrary access feature. Currently it's only possible to access items that are connected to the current page. So for example on Vincent van Gogh you can access the statements on Q5582, but you can't access these statements on Category:Vincent van Gogh or Creator:Vincent van Gogh. With arbitrary access enabled on Commons we no longer have this limitation. This opens up the possibility to use Wikidata data on Creator, Institution, Authority control and other templates instead of duplicating the data (what we do now). This will greatly enhance the usefulness of Wikidata for Commons.

To use the full potential of arbitrary access the Commons community needs to reimplement several templates in LUA. In LUA it's possible to use the local fields and fallback to Wikidata if it's not locally available. Help with this conversion is greatly appreciated. The different tasks are tracked in phabricator, see https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T89594 .

Volunteers are continuing to add data about artworks to Wikidata. Sometimes an institution website is used and sometimes data is being transfered from Commons to Wikidata. Wikidata now has almost 35.000 items about paintings. This is done as part of the WikiProject sum of all paintings. This helps us to learn how to d:Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts/Item structuremodel and refine metadata about artworks. Experience that will of course be very useful for Commons too.

Additionally, the metadata cleanup drive continues to produce results. The drive, which is intended to identify files missing {{information}} or the like structured data fields and to add such fields when absent, has reduced the number of files missing information by almost 100,000 on Commons. You can help by looking for files with similarly-formatted description pages, and listing them at Commons:Bots/Work requests so that a bot can add the {{information}} template on them.

At the Amsterdam Hackathon in November 2014, a couple of different models were developed about how artwork can be viewed on the web using structured data from Wikidata. You can browse two examples here and here. These examples can give you an idea of the kind of data that file pages have the potential to display on-wiki in the future.

The Structured Data project is a long-term one, and the volunteers and staff will continue working together to provide the structure and support in the back-end toward front-end development. There are still many things to do to help advance the project, and I hope to have more news for you in the near future. Contact me any time with questions, comments, concerns.

-- User:Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:46, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dario, You're receiving this update because you asked to be informed about the Wikipedia Science Conference taking place in London on 2nd and 3rd of September. Thanks for your interest.

The call for proposals is now public and session proposals are coming in. The two keynotes, and some other invited speakers, have graciously accepted. In mid-May we will bring together a programme, a publicity poster, and an online booking form. Then we'll begin the main publicity and will need your help getting the word out.

Please put in a session proposal if you've been thinking of doing so: the deadline is the 8th May. This is far from the only way to be involved. The conference will need session moderators, a programme review group, and other volunteers: if there is a specific role you are interested in, or if you have any other questions, please email me at m.l.poulterbristol.ac.uk.

There will be a large "unconference" session in the programme and - fingers crossed - a "hackathon" event two days later on the Saturday, so even if you do not have a proposal accepted, you will have a chance to shape the conference activities.

Please pass on the word to any colleagues who might want to put in a proposal or help the conference in any way.

The previous publicity might have made it seem like we're only interested in contributors from the UK. Just to clarify, we've love to have international contributors, but with the conference having a very small budget we can't guarantee to pay expenses for international speakers. I don't want to create the expectation that expenses will be met, then let people down, but if you can get to London it would be great to have you.

Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 12:04, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @MartinPoulter: I'm definitely considering to attend and I'll submit a session proposal. --DarTar (talk) 19:56, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite isbn/978887283436 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:33, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I posted that same question that you raised two years ago. Feel invited to comment. --bender235 (talk) 23:08, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2014 South Napa earthquake you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of David Eppstein -- David Eppstein (talk) 06:41, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Talk:Planet Nine (2016 hypothesis) on round objects, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It is unambiguous vandalism or an obvious hoax. (See section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia; doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.
• It is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. (See section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. AlwaysUnite (talk) 18:31, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for using the collections feature in Wikipedia beta! Due to technical and moderation issues, we will be turning off this experimental feature. Your collections will be available for viewing and export until March 1st. If you would like to save your collection as links on a special Wikipedia page, please fill out the following form. If you are interested in giving your feedback about Wikipedia Collections please do so here.

Thanks,

Jon Katz
Product manager, Wikimedia Foundation
Jkatz (WMF) (talk) 23:52, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sono sto pingato per iscrivermi in it:Wikipedia:Labels/Tipologia degli edit ma non posso registrarmi perché sono bloccato, ma ho sempre sostenuto queste cose quindi se ti serve sono a disposizione. Anche su altri progetti in italiano o altre lingue, sono poliglotta tanto.

Comunque fa sorridere come due anni fa quando si dicevano queste cose tutti parlavano di "giochi di ruolo" e "burocrazia" e adesso c'è la fila. Come cambiano i tempi... --Alexmar983 (talk) 01:54, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexmar983: non sapevo, mi spiace. Grazie della spiegazione. --DarTar (talk) 23:37, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Più una giustificazione. Se dovessi spiegare dovrei riprendere tipo discussioni del passato dove ci sono state fortissime opposizioni ma sarebbe troppo noioso e allo stato inutile. Non mi preoccupa la mutevolezza o la scarsa proiezione nel futuro, le cose avvengono, mi preoccupa che questa condizione al contorno le faccia precedere peggio o più lentamente o più frammentariamente di come potrebbero. Mettere in contatto la parte più addentro al lavoro quotidiano con quella con capacità tecniche non era impossibile ma non è stato mai agevole o reso tale, quindi mi spiace che te e Hjfocs trovrete un punto di partenza che è più basso di quello che avrebbe potuto essere. Gli strumenti funzionano meglio se sono per tutti, e se c'è una comunità organica che li immagina, li chiede e li raffina, altrimenti la loro introduzione è faticosa. La stessa persona che vuole verticalismo gustifcando con la delicatezza o l'urgenza della situazione in un caso, si oppone nell'altro oppure ne difende a spada tratta uno fa resistenza passiva all'altro, nell'introduzione o nello sviluppo, e viceversa, anche se con un po' di prospettiva si intuisce che sono parte di un continuum.

Fra l'altro ci furono con alcuni utenti dei test più semplici sulla tassonomia di edit purtroppo basati solo su rozze stringhe di caratteri quando disponibili nell'oggetto. Che c'era "ciccia" si intuiva.

Venendo a cose concrete ho visto il ping qui e su itwiki. In IRC. Grazie della cortesia ma alle 17 qui in Cina sono le due di notte, quindi non ci sono (sarebbe anche la prima volta che uso IRC). Però se vuoi dei commenti su it:Wikipedia:Labels/Tipologia degli edit/Tassonomia te li lascio subito.

1) Nelle azioni mancherebbe secondo me "sostituzione e aggiornamento". Questo spesso implica sia rimozione che aggiunta, ma va distinto da rimozione e aggiunta di aspetti non collegati;

2) andrebbe separata l'azione sporadica da quella seriale. Esempio: sapere se l'utente ha aggiornato la popolazioni in un comune mentre lavorava sulla voce del comune è diverso che se l'ha fatto aggiornando le popolazioni di più comuni da un sito specifico. Nel primo caso devo studiare molto bene l'azione in sè perché se c'è forse un errore sistemico (fonte impropria), e lo sta ripetendo, nel secondo la priorità è minore, anzi devo aiutare magari l'utente con il modello di voce del comune. Altro esempio: un aggiornamento eccessivamente dettagliato di una sitografia, la sostituzione di un aggettivo di nazionalità con un altro etc... un patroller esperto lo vede subito. Magari non può valutare se l'edit in sè va bene ma spesso va in talk da chi è esperto segnalando subito tale edit. Ecco soprattutto se non sa chi è esperto o non ha tempo, è più facile per chi lavora individuare un comportamento seriale e quindi prioritario di verifica.

3) l'oggetto "punteggiatura" secondo me può anche chiamarsi "Punteggiatura e ortografia". Nella mia esperienza quasi mai nessun utente si focalizza sull'una o l'altra, sono riletture. O comunque mancherebbe "ortografia" se la vuoi disitnguere da "punteggiatura" perché è solo un aspetto di "wikificazione";

4) nei "Template generico" dovresti disitinguere "infobox" da "navbox", L'infobox laterale è un template che ha un processo di approvazione e un tecnicismo superiore al semplice navbox a fondo pagina, per esempio.

Sono questi i tipi di commenti di cui hai bisogno? Sto centrando il punto? Posso continuare se ti serve. Molte di queste cose te le diranno spero altri, quindi faccio prima a leggere ogni tanto la pagina e lasciare un commento qui.

In ogni caso gli altri progetti in lingua italiano hanno una tassonomia molto più semplice (azioni meccaniche, più schematiche) quindi se vuoi partire anche da quelli non dovrebbe essere troppo complicato. tanto basta un avviso al bar per radunare quasi tutti gli utenti attivi, e se sono d'accordo è anche uno sforzo più diretto.

In merito all'aiuto per raffinare è possibile adesso nelle fasi successive ottenere un target di utenze collaboratrici più composito calibrato su alcuni parametri di attività che potrebbe essere interessate al lavoro che state facendo. Analogamente già in questa fase it:Wikipedia:Labels/Tipologia degli edit poteva essere segnalata su pagine di discussione abbastanza tecniche dove sono attive utenze più di interfaccia. Fra queste Discussioni_Wikipedia:Rollbacker, Discussioni_aiuto:Cronologia, Discussioni_progetto:Patrolling. Non avresti avuto tanti nuovi nomi ma sarebbe stati molto motivati. Fra le utenze forse interessate fin da subito all'argomento c'è probabilmente Utente:Fullerene.--Alexmar983 (talk) 06:53, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Did you know about Wikiversity Journal of Medicine? It is an open access, peer reviewed medical journal, with no publication charges. We welcome you to have a look. Feel free to participate.

You can participate in any one or more of the following ways:

• Publish an article to the journal.
• Sign up as a peer reviewer of potential upcoming articles. If you do not have expertise in these subjects, you can help in finding peer reviewers for current submissions.
• Sign up as an editor, and help out in open tasks.
• Outreach to potential contributors, with can include (but is not limited to) scholars and health professionals. In any mention of Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, there may be a reference to this Contribute-page. Example presentation about the journal.
• Add a post-publication review of an existing publication. If errors are found, there are guidelines for editing published works.
• Apply to become the treasurer of the journal
• Join the editorial board.
• Share your ideas of what the journal would be like in the future as separate Wikimedia project.
• Donate to Wikimedia Foundation.
• Translate journal pages into other languages. Wikiversity currently exists in the following other languages
  • Ceština, Deutsch, Español, Français, Italiano, 한국어, Português, Slovenšcina, Suomi, Svenska, Ελληνικά, Русский, العربية, 日本語
• Sign up to get emails related to the journal, which are sent to updateswijoumed.org. If you want to receive these emails too, state your interest at the talk page, or contact the Editor-in-chief at haggstrom.mikaelwikiversityjournal.org.
• Spread the word to anyone who could be interested or could benefit from it.

The future of this journal as a separate Wikimedia project is under discussion and the name can be changed suitably. Currently a voting for the same is underway. Please cast your vote in the name you find most suitable. We would be glad to receive further suggestions from you. It is also acceptable to mention your votes in the wide-reachwikiversityjournal.org email list. Please note that the voting closes on 16th August, 2016, unless protracted by consensus, due to any reason.

-from Diptanshu.D (talk · contribs · count) and others of the Editorial Board, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine.

Diptanshu^Talk 09:57, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2016 Ferndale earthquake is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016 Ferndale earthquake until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Dawnseeker2000 16:46, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DarTar. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "WP:Altmetrics".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 (talk) 03:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to ISMB/ECCB Wikipedia and Wikidata EditathonAs a member of WikiProject Computational Biology, you're invited to an editathon jointly hosted with the ISCB on 23 July 2017 as part of the ISMB/ECCB 2017 conference in Prague! If you're attending the conference, we'd love to see you there: there will be prizes (and snacks) too! The editathon is throughout the day on a drop-in basis, so easy to work into your schedule. We are especially looking for experienced Wikipedians to help out newbies. If you have some free time, please sign up for a slot on the signup sheet! Further details and registration: Wikipedia:WikiProject Computational Biology/ISMB-ECCB 2017 Editathon. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings from WikiProject Computational Biology, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. (Message delivered:11:20, 10 July 2017 (UTC))

ISCB Wikipedia Competition 2017-18: entries open! The International Society for Computational Biology (ISCB) and WikiProject Computational Biology are pleased to call for participants in the 2017-18 ISCB Wikipedia Competition. The ISCB aims to improve the communication of scientific knowledge to the public at large, and Wikipedia and its sister sites play an increasingly important role in this communication; the ISCB Wikipedia Competition aims to improve the quality of Wikipedia articles relating to computational biology. Entries to the competition are open now! Articles may be claimed until 1 Dec 2017 and the competition closes on 31 Dec 2017. For students/trainees: Entry to the competition is open internationally to students and trainees of any level, both as individuals and as groups. Prizes of up to $500 will be awarded to the best contributions as chosen by a judging panel of experts; these will be awarded at the Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology conference in Chicago in July 2018. As in previous years, the ISCB encourages competition entries for contributions to Wikipedia in any language, and contributions to Wikidata items. For teachers/trainers: We encourage you to pass this invitation on to your students, or even consider using the competition as part of an in-class assignment. Further details may be found at: Wikipedia:WikiProject Computational Biology/ISCB competition announcement 2017-18. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings from WikiProject Computational Biology, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. (Message delivered:MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:30, 5 October 2017 (UTC))[reply]