User talk:Osiris/December 2011

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 1
| Archive 2


Burhan br (talk) 06:12, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


You forgot to add {{Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2011/Igreja Pentecostal e Apostólica Missão Jesus}} to Wikipedia:Requests for deletion - I've just added it. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 19:26, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Oops! Thanks for that! :) Osiris (talk) 02:51, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

New stub type

Yeah, I made that mistake too. I think you have to ask on WT:SSP. Have you already? πr2 (talk • changes) 03:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh lord! :) No, I didn't know about that, but I see there's already a discussion on it with a consensus that seems to have been fogotten. Does an admin have to create it? Osiris (talk) 03:23, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up about that and for fixing the category markup also. Osiris (talk) 03:31, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Dating maintenance tags

Do you think you could be a bit selective about dating all the maintenance tags? I'm concerned about all the new categories that will require, as compared to the benefit we'd actually get from it. Maybe just date tags that you're going to work on? --Auntof6 (talk) 05:50, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I will get to all of them eventually. Dating them puts them in my workload. What do you mean by new categories? I'm tagging all of them December 2011... Osiris (talk) 05:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Ah, OK, that should be manageable then. Thanks for the reply. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:58, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
By the way, since you're looking at this, you might have some input/interest in something I was looking at. I noticed that the individual maintenance tags don't always use the same categories as the matching parameters in {{articleissues}}. You can see some work I did on that here. If you ever felt like helping make the categories match, that would be welcome. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:06, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Oh, wow! I was trying to fix one of those today; I had no luck with it. From what I can see though, the template doesn't allow you to omit a date, so I'm not sure what the undate-cat parameters are there for...(?) Apart from that one, the parameters in the unreferenced section work perfectly (see Cupboard for example). Each issue identified should allot the article into two categories (the "all" category and a monthly subcategory). I tried matching the unreferenced section markup for the refimprove section, but it still doesn't work. Any ideas? Thanks for summarising the problems, I didn't know it was that extensive. :) Osiris (talk) 06:30, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

What does subjective refer to

When somebody says subjective in reference to certain articles or categories on Wikipedia, what do they mean? The Univ of Northern Iowa school class at (talk) 06:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

It means that something is slanted toward someone's personal opinion or feelings. The opposite is "objective", meaning that no specific viewpoint is emphasized. Everything on Wikipedia should be objective. (See WP:NPOV.) --Auntof6 (talk) 07:12, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Oops, sorry, I didn't notice that this was Osiris' talk page -- I had it on my watch list watching for a reply to my message. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:05, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia category cleanup

Good idea for a category. Note, however, that not everything you've included there actually needs cleaning up. Specifically Category redirects, Stub categories, and Templates with categories. Should those maybe be put in a category like "Category issues", in the same way that we have "Article issues"? --Auntof6 (talk) 18:49, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

That's probably a better name, yes. But there are so few possible subcategories that I think it'd be best to keep them all together for now. I don't know why I went with "cleanup"— what do you think of just having the one under "Category issues"? Osiris (talk) 06:51, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


Categorisation barnstar1b.png The Categorisation Barnstar
:) --Chenzw  Talk  09:06, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg Thanks mate. Osiris (talk) 09:10, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Date categories and templates

Hey there! You're doing some great work since popping up and I commend you for that. However, I'd like it if you could possibly take a look at my comments here and also stop any further categorisation by date until we have developed a consensus for this (or otherwise) via Simple talk - this goes for any categories. I'll wait to put my full concerns down until a discussion is begun, but in short this is not something that has historically worked here, and just creates more work than it is worth. We prefer much more simplified and streamlined processes here to EN, rather than just copying them, and personally I feel all of this date categorisation is unnecessary. Furthermore, we've seen it before and it's never been sustained, and I cannot see it continuing if you were to depart for whatever reason. (And, to be honest, I cannot see [m]any users dating the maintenance tags themselves [what happened before], and it would be counter-productive to go through tagging every single one with a date, even using a bot - we have more important things to worry about!) Regards, Goblin 18:01, 17 December 2011 (UTC) I ♥ PeterSymonds!

Oops, I've just seen that there is a discussion already. Please let this run it's course (Ideally around two weeks) before continuing, if a consensus is reached. Goblin 18:02, 17 December 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Juliancolton!
Sure, I'll respond there tomorrow sometime. But except for the Complex pages case, I actually haven't introduced any new by-date categorisation. I'm just creating monthly cleanup categories that have already been populated by maintenance templates—the dating systems are already in place. Osiris (talk) 18:20, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
No worries, thanks! :) I realise you've not started yet which is why I wanted to bring it up now to avoid any effort wasted. By all means create the redlinked categories (As that needs doing if they've been categorised, as it's equal unnecessary work to de-categorise everything. My point, I guess, is not to date anything new, and that we should look to pass a discussion on this first. Best, Goblin 18:23, 17 December 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Bsadowski1!
Oh, that's fine I won't start anything new. Thanks, Face-smile.svg Osiris (talk) 18:31, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
I forgot to mention, that ST discussion is mostly about dating the maintenance tags for editors' benefit, not about overhauling the categorisation system. The complex category was the only other category I felt needed to be subdivided—I have no intention of dating any other categories (in fact, I've removed several counts of template-based category-dating where I thought it unnecessary) because they're so small. Most maintenance templates now no longer sort to a dated category, but they still have the date parameter enabled so that editors can see when a tag was added—for the reasons I've given on the ST thread and which I feel to be important. Just wanted to make sure we're clear as your comment on the deletion thread seemed to indicate you think I am intending a kind of revolution in how we categorise the backlog... ;) Osiris (talk) 03:13, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
When we started dating cats in en:, many years ago Emblem-cool.svg we were partly looking to break down large cats. But I have come to the realisation that even for small cats, dating helps to indicate if there are particularly recalcitrant items, which need taking care of. There is a certain satisfaction in gettign the last one of a monthly category too, so these get done even if they are difficult. Rich Farmbrough, 17:37, 21 December 2011 (UTC).
I agree there is a psychological element of the dating system that benefits progress. Osiris (talk) 17:42, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Big thank you!

Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Man's Barnstar
For digging in and synching up all those cleanup categories! Auntof6 (talk) 22:15, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Aw, shucks! No worries! Face-smile.svg Thank you for having made it so easy! Osiris (talk) 22:16, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Another favour please?

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Osiris. You have new messages at Chenzw's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Be aware

Empty dated clean up categories more than a month old will nominate themselves for speedy deleteion. Category:Quick_deletion_requests Rich Farmbrough, 17:09, 21 December 2011 (UTC).

Really? How does that work? Osiris (talk) 17:10, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Your new template

Hi there Osiris! I'm just here to let you know that I moved your recently created template, {{Articles that need to be wikified progress}}. This is because it was in the mainspace (i.e. article zone) before, due to a typo in the title. I moved it to the template space. By the way, do keep up your hard work here, it hasn't gone un-noticed! Regards, -Orashmatash- 17:48, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Orash. Finger must've slipped. :) Osiris (talk) 17:50, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Addition to {{Backlog status}}

Would you add Category:Wikipedia protected edit requests to this template? I could probably do it, but you've been working with it and you'd probably know better which section it should go in. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 04:33, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Osiris (talk) 14:46, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Category moves

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Osiris. You have new messages at Chenzw's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.