![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
[1] -- Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:17, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Welcome to the second edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. -- Sarah ( talk) 21:41, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Hey guys.
I appreciate this isn't quite what you signed up for, but I figured as people who are already pretty good at evaluating whether material is useful or not useful through Special:NewPages, you might be interested :). Over the last few months we've been developing the new Article Feedback Tool, which features a free text box. it is imperative that we work out in advance what proportion of feedback is useful or not so we can adjust the design accordingly and not overwhelm you with nonsense.
This is being done through the
Feedback Evaluation System (FES), a tool that lets editors run through a stream of comments, selecting their value and viability, so we know what type of design should be promoted or avoided. We're about to start a new round of evaluations, beginning with an
office hours session tomorrow at 18:00 UTC. If you'd like to help preemptively kill poor feedback, come along to #wikimedia-office and we'll show you how to use the tool. If you can't make it, send me an email at okeyeswikimedia.org or drop a note on my talkpage, and I'm happy to give you a quick walkthrough in a one-on-one session :).
All the best, Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 21:37, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
moved from User talk:User talk:Bluerasberry-- Jac16888 Talk 12:43, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Bluerasberry. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click
HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:15, 6 April 2012 (UTC) |
Hi BlueRasberry,
I think we met at an IA/UX meetup a while back, but I lost your contact info. Then I saw you posted about a UW grad class doing wikiwork that might be interested in drawing on the Teahouse. Super cool! Let me know if you want to chat about this in person some time. I'm on campus most days. - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 03:25, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Help talk:Citation Style 1. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 11:17, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Just an FYI since you were involved in the conversation: Template_talk:Welcome#Linking_to_the_Teahouse_on_the_welcome_template. Sarah ( talk) 19:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello. You have
a new message at yasht101's talk page.
Yash
t
101
03:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Thought you would be interested in this special event if you're up for the trip: Wikipedia:Meetup/Portland.-- Pharos ( talk) 14:16, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Like India and Pakistan, there is a similar contest in US.
There are more than 80K unassessed articles about United States. United States has a good number of articles now and needs clean up. This will be beneficial for articles as well as editors as they will be able to interact with editors in their country and will learn new things and can obtain a lot of knowledge about their country. The drive will run from 11 April 2012 to 11 December 2012. The opening/closing time for both days is midnight/0001 hours of that day IST.
The purpose of holding this contest is three-fold:
I thought that you might be interested in it. I also needed help from someone as an organizer in that. If you are interested, then please let me know. Thank you! Yash t 101 01:42, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. You might be interested in this. outreach:Wikipedia Education Program Metrics and Activities Meeting. The next meeting is April 23. You can also add your name to the list here to get meeting announcements in the future. meta:Global message delivery/Targets/Wikipedia Education Program meeting Pine (talk) 09:51, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
It was very much a pleasure meeting you this weekend. I wish that I could have chatted longer, but I look forward to continuing our conversation and meeting again in soon. I remain very intrigued by your contribution history and the work you do and hope that we can find ways to work together in the future. Will be in touch soon. -- Another Believer ( Talk) 19:59, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
Wikipedia Motivation Award | |
Given in recognition of your tireless work promoting the Wikipedia as a primary source of information. Good luck in New York! |
Hi, I am an Online Ambassador for the India Education Program interested in gender gap and feminism. I am writing in response to your message on the talk page of Wikiproject India/ Women and gender issues : I have signed up for the Gender and Economic Development in the Third World project as a volunteer. I would be able to work with this project starting from the month of June. Thanks! -- Netha Hussain ( talk) 03:56, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Lane--In http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:United_States_Education_Program/Courses/Gender_and_Economic_Development_in_the_Third_World_%28Gunseli_Berik%29 one title is supposed to be "Women and Environment" and the other has to be "Women's rights in Tonga" (not "Women"). Thanks. BerikG ( talk) 05:36, 27 April 2012 (UTC)BerikG And one other correction "Discrimination against girls in India," not "girl child." 155.97.89.227 ( talk) 18:21, 27 April 2012 (UTC)BerikG
I assume that it is you who is starting with consumer reports. Congrats on getting chosen. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 07:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Hey Bluerasberry/Archive 6 :). A quick update on how things are going with the New Page Triage/New Pages Feed project. As the enwiki page notes, the project is divided into two chunks: the "list view" (essentially an updated version of Special:NewPages) and the "article view", a view you'll be presented with when you open up individual articles that contains a toolbar with lots of options to interact with the page - patrolling it, adding maintenance tags, nominating it for deletion, so on.
On the list view front, we're pretty much done! We tried deploying it to enwiki, in line with our Engagement Strategy on Wednesday, but ran into bugs and had to reschedule - the same happened on Thursday :(. We've queued a new deployment for Monday PST, and hopefully that one will go better. If it does, the software will be ready to play around with and test by the following week! :).
On the article view front, the developers are doing some fantastic work designing the toolbar, which we're calling the "curation bar"; you can see a mockup here. A stripped-down version of this should be ready to deploy fairly soon after the list view is; I'm afraid I don't have precise dates yet. When I have more info, or can unleash everyone to test the list view, I'll let you know :). As always, any questions to the talkpage for the project or mine. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 23:27, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 12:16, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
Have you been appointed to a WMF position regarding the company Consumer Reports? I thought I saw an announcement somewhere but I can't find it. (If true, does that mean that the information that regular people have to pay money to get from Consumer Reports will be available to wikipedians?) Regards MathewTownsend ( talk) 21:19, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Hey Bluerasberry! We've finally finished the NPT prototype and deployed it on enwiki. We'll be holding an office hours session on the 16th at 21:00 in #wikimedia-office to show it off, get feedback and plot future developments - hope to see you there! Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 03:36, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
The Schools Barnstar | |
Thank you for creating the framework for the Coeducation at Princeton University article and for fielding questions from new users during the Women at Princeton edit-a-thon! Undead q ( talk) 19:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC) |
Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback!
We have created a brief survey intended to help us understand the experiences and impressions of veteran editors who have participated on the Teahouse. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages some time during the last few months.
Click here to be taken to the survey site.
The survey should take less than 15 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!
Happy editing,
J-Mo, Teahouse host
This message was sent via Global message delivery on 01:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Hey all :). A notification that the prototype for the New Pages Feed is now live on enwiki! We had to briefly take it down after an unfortunate bug started showing up, but it's now live and we will continue developing it on-site.
The page can be found at Special:NewPagesFeed. Please, please, please test it and tell us what you think! Note that as a prototype it will inevitably have bugs - if you find one not already mentioned at the talkpage, bring it up and I'm happy to carry it through to the devs. The same is true of any additions you can think of to the software, or any questions you might have - let me know and I'll respond.
Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 13:20, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
Thanks for the coffee Bluerasberry. Sorry for being late and I see your concern about the show have already been answered. Share a Tea with me and have a great day. Msrag ( talk) 05:51, 23 May 2012 (UTC) |
Hi. I'm not sure if you (still) have any interest in this page (or if you have it on your watchlist, for that matter), but I cleaned it up this morning. Turning the page into a proper disambiguation page was mostly a matter of moving some content to Safe harbor (law), moving some content to Safe harbor (commerce), and then cutting a bunch of text. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 18:06, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi The references I removed mostly ether pointed to a manufacturer who sells TENS machines if you copy and past a section in Mechanism, Commons or the top section/lead in you will see that.I consider this biased apart from the fact that the information was completely incorrect ( more of a sales pitch). Another manufacturer had their product name on the page by twisting the facts under modern, A number of the references also ended up being a book you would have to buy to confirm if it was fact.
The way the article was, was a complete mess and largely inaccurate and misleading. I have tried to give it a balance by also putting in a ref to a public forum which has over 4,000 ubaised consumer reviews, a medical professionals 15 page report on the way it works, a link to pubmed were they can read over 2,500 unbiased clinical reports and reference papers etc.
My understanding of Wikipedia was that it was meant to present the facts as closely as possible in an unbiased way which the way the article was is certainly not the case.
I am more than happy for anyone to critique what I have done or change areas they fell are inaccurate or input other opinions but if they can simply delete the hole thing having never contributed to it and revert it back to what it was "almost complete rubbish promoting two manufacturers products" then Wikipedia becomes a very doubtful place to look for accurate information. To leave it as it was, was a disservice to the public in my opinion many of whom have painful conditions and are looking for solutions.
I was not alone in my opinion as to it's inaccuracies as you will see if you look at previous editors comments, I have also studied TENS for over two years and have used it personally for over three years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisandbev ( talk • contribs) 21:05, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Sorry forgot to sign my message Chrisandbev ( talk) 21:07, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
On the phone with Peteforsyth ( talk · contribs), who says it'll be good for us to know each other. Glad to hear you are working with CR. tedder ( talk) 02:16, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
I've reverted you. I don't understand why your edit summary said "Science 2.0 or Research 2.0 refers to the practice of using Web 2.0 techniques in science." The very first version of this article said little else than "Science 2.0 or Research 2.0 refers to the practice of using Web 2.0 techniques in science." Sometime in May or June 2010 an editor changed this, claiming it was a trademark, and then there is a history of edit-warring. But you can't just keep a title and make a basic change in the article subject, which is why I've reverted you. I'm assuming you aren't aware of the original versions. Dougweller ( talk) 20:27, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Le Monde logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:16, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for checking up on the page. I was wondering if you could help me I am trying to add some citations and pictures as requirements for our project. I am having trouble adding them do you think you could help me? Or could you clairfy the instrucitons because the ones given on wikipedia are not clear at all!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koachinyung ( talk • contribs) 04:29, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
at my successful RFA |
Thank you, Bluerasberry, for !voting at my successful RFA; I am humbled that you put your trust in me. I grant you this flower, which, if tended to properly, will grow to be the fruit of Wikipedia's labours. Cute hamster! — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 13:53, 3 June 2012 (UTC) |
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Science 2.0 (website), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Science 2.0. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. MadmanBot ( talk) 23:00, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Science 2.0 (website) 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/Science 2.0 (website) 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 template from the top of the article. Dougweller ( talk) 13:41, 5 June 2012 (UTC)