User talk:Clarkcj12/January 2015

Thanks for the infoboxes!

Adding infoboxes is something I keep meaning to get around to, so thanks for adding some. Would you take a look at Medemblik? The infobox you added had some references in it that use a template we don't have. Not only does the article now need a reference section added, but the template should either be created or removed. Let me know if you'd like me to import the template. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 04:28, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

@Auntof6: Your welcome, but I think I did them mostly. Also thanks for letting me know about that "that" article was missing the source section, I didn't realize that until you told me just now. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 04:38, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Hey, a few other things. First, the references section should be called "References", not "Sources", per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#References_or_Notes.

Second, I assume you're copying the infoboxes from enwiki: are you making any changes at all to them? I've been trying to get all the flags out of infoboxes (per en:WP:INFOBOXFLAG, so if you're making any other changes and you wouldn't mind replacing the flags with plain text links, that would be great! If not, then don't worry. It's more important to get the infoboxes than to go to great lengths for this, and I can just get them later.

Last, along the same lines and only if you're making other changes: unlike enwiki, our page Eastern Time Zone is a dab page. If you're making other changes and you felt like disambiguating that link where it exists in the infoboxes, that would be great. Otherwise, as above, somebody will probably go through and fix them later.

Thanks again, and don't stress about any of these, because they're things that can be found later if you don't want to do them. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:39, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Hey, when you're adding infoboxes, would you check to see if they cause categories to be added? At least one article, 07-Ghost, now has some redlinked categories that seem to be coming from the template. I would not like to see a lot of redlinked categories show up because of new infoboxes being added. Maybe we could either suppress or change the category code in the infoboxes, or create enough similar articles to get to the 3-entry minimum to create the categories (assuming they're categories we'd want). What do you think? --Auntof6 (talk) 09:05, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

@Auntof6: It may be easier to import just some of the manga articles from English Wikipedia. But I can try to suppress the categories if you would like. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 21:15, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Maybe a combination of the two. I definitely think we should suppress the error/tracking categories, like Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of anime and manga, because I don't think we need them here even if we had the minimum number of articles. Another category in question is Category:2009 anime television series -- we might not have enough anime articles to break them down by year. If you need help changing the templates, I could help with that. What do you think? --Auntof6 (talk) 23:19, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

@Auntof6: Sure I could probably use some help with changing the templates. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 01:28, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Animal taxoboxes

Please don't update the animal taxoboxes, because I have already simplified most of them to the level we need for this wiki. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Macdonald-ross:, was there a consensus reached about exactly what should be in the taxoboxes? If so, a link to that discussion would be helpful here. Even if there was a discussion, though, we can't tell people not to edit them -- they aren't owned by anyone. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:38, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

That amounts to saying that anyone can force us to use exactly the same templates as En wiki, even when they are not (at least in part) appropriate. And that is the same as saying that an experienced editor's work can be removed en masse by someone without considering the effect, or without giving an appropriate reason. Just because the material is in the form of a template does not alter the case. Templates affect the suitability of a page for readers. I am asking him as one editor to another. He may refuse, in which case you may be right in hinting that there is nothing I can do about it. However, I'm hoping he will voluntarily agree to lay off. The discussion on Simple talk is highly relevant here, because we have no policy or method for adapting infoboxes and other templates to our needs. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:58, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

It does not amount to that. I'm just saying we should have something more to back this up than one editor saying they don't want their work undone. The current discussion at Simple Talk is relevant, but isn't (yet) a consensus. Don't take it personally: Clarkcj may not have paid attention to the edit history to see that specific work was done by the same editor on multiple templates. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:06, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

@Macdonald-ross and Auntof6: I will lay off on addition of the scientific names, but only thing I won't lay off on is the status of the animal, and/or including the status ref. But I would recommend that if people are not supposed to add those fields to the taxobox then why not remove them? If you feel having those would make it to complex, imho it doesn't really as adding those scientific names is basically saying other names or the animals how about proposing in order to make it less confusing as I do understand that using Binomial Names is kind of confusing on a Simple English wiki but, I know its not really a scientific name for Binomial Names but the meaning is similar how about changing the header to Other names, or even Similar names so people understand that they are other names for the same animal. Or even name the header Other scientific names as imho that would make it a bit more simplified, and it would be an easy change to incur and easy to update the taxoboxs' --Clarkcj12 (talk) 05:10, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to Medical Translation

Medical Translation Project

Invitation to the Medical Translation Project – a joint Wikimedia project started by the English language WikiProject Medicine! Thank you for being one of the top Medical editors! I want to use this opportunity to introduce you to our most ambitious project. We want to use Wikipedia to spread knowledge where it will be used. Studies have shown that Wikipedia is the most common resource of medical knowledge, and used by more people than any other source! We want high quality articles, available to everyone, regardless of language ability. It isn't right that you would need to know a major language to get hold of quality content! That is why in the recent Ebola crisis (which is still ongoing) we translated information into over 70 languages, many of them small African languages. This was important, as Wikipedia was also shown to be the biggest resource used in Africa for information on Ebola! We see tremendous potential, but also great risks as our information needs to be accurate and well-researched. We only translate articles that have been reviewed by medical doctors and experts, so that what we translate is correct. Many of our translators are professionals, but many are also volunteers, and we need more of you guys – both to translate, but also to import finished translations, and fix grammatical or other style issues that are introduced by the translation process. Our articles are not only translated into small languages, but also to larger ones, but as of 2015 this requires users to apply for an article to be translated, which can be done here (full articles, short articles) with an easy to manage google document. So regardless of your background head over to our main page for more information, or to our talk page and ask us questions. Feel free to respond in any language, we will do our best to find some way to communicate. No task is too small, and we need everyone to help out! I hope you will forgive me for sending this message in English – we also need translators for messages like this, and above all local language community managers, which act as a link between us and you. Also I can not reply on your talk page, so please go to our talk page! Thank you for helping medical information on Wikipedia grow! -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 15:37, 28 January 2015 (UTC) Google Translation of this message