User talk:Beland

/Praise Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Criteria/Current

Category problems with counties

Hi Beland, I've noticed the Pearl bot will add the County Category to a parent county even if it already exists. I think that it is related to having a category that looks like this. Category:Imperial County California| ]] I do that so that in the Sub Category, the parent always appears first for ease of use. The bot then adds the same county sub category. See Imperial County, California for the end result. Sortior 23:38, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

Ooo, good catch. I've upgraded Pearle's brain so that this shouldn't happen in the future. I will have to devise some method for finding other articles where the same thing happened. I suppose it would be a good idea to take a look at the entire tree of political divisions of the USA at the end of the current run, anyway, to see if there are any more anomalies. Thanks, Beland 04:30, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Category:Columbus Township, St. Clair County, Michigan

I'm wondering why Pearle created this category. I had thought User:D6 created it, since I only noticed it after D6 had added Columbus Township, St. Clair County, Michigan to the category, which was otherwise empty. Anyhow, township categories are a bad thing, IMO, with the possible exception of some large charter townships that might have enough going on in them to warrant a category, like some cities have. older≠wiser 03:37, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

It looks like a link from Columbus, Michigan to "Columbus_Township, St._Clair_County, Michigan" was interpreted as being a link to a county with the name "Columbus Township, St. Clair", so Columbus, Michigan was added to it. Then there was a second pass to add all Michigan county categories to "Category:Michigan counties", which by necessity creates a lot of new categories (because many only had articles assigned them, not any intro text), so no warning was triggered.

I checked, and this is the only township category Pearle has created. I agree they they are unnecessary, as I wrote in the WikiProject Cities proposal. I will nominate this category for deletion, and make a note to modify matching logic to avoid this problem in the future. Thanks for checking up on it. -- Beland 04:29, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Trinidad towns

I suppose my question wasn't quite clear - I was just wondering if I re-name the category 'Towns of (in) Trinidad and Tobago' to 'Cities and towns' - as it stands there are only two "cities" in Trinidad, and I included them in the "towns" list (the difference in that case is somewhat trivial, because the "cities" are the second and third largest 'towns', while the largest 'town' wasn't even a municipality until 1990). The thought was really - if I choose to rename the category, should I wait until after the change has been run (and then empty and CFD the old category) - I assume that would be less confusing than to empty and CFD the category so that it appears in two places? Of course, no one has complained about the naming as it stands - maybe "towns" is fine for something as small as Trinidad. Sorry about the rambling... Guettarda 04:49, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)!

Thanks very much. Legally municipalities covers two entities in Trinidad - "cities" (the City of Port of Spain and the City of San Fernando) and "boroughs" (the Borough of Chaguanas, the Borough of Point Fortin and the Royal Borough of Arima). The term "town" is generally used for these and any other settlement of some size and history, while "village" might be used for smaller entities. The usage of "town" for things like Siparia, Couva, St. Joseph and Tunapuna (to pick a few examples) is historical, covers a valid entity and (in several cases) an administrative center, but not an "incorporated municipality" with any legal standing. Nonetheless, leaving the examples I stated out of a list wouldn't make sense (if the articles existed) - St. Joseph, for example, is the oldest European town in Trinidad (founded in the 1500s). Similarly, Scarborough in Tobago is the administrative centre, and it's the largest town on the island, but it does not have a legal status distinct from the rest of the island. On the other hand, laws that apply to "built up areas" would cover these examples (for example, there are two speed limits in Trinidad, one for built up areas and one for open areas).

My point (if I have one) is that there are legal distinctions between cities and towns, and there are also legal distinctions between municipalities and other towns. It doesn't fit well into the American model(s) of towns and cities (my favourite is the "City of Atqasuk" in Alaska - which has 200 people and is only accessible by air - or snow mobile/dog sled in winter). Legally it's a city, but when I was there in 1996 there was a plaque on the wall with a greeting from President Clinton to the "Village of Atqasuk". seems weird to me that the two extremes can be used interchangeably. Guettarda 13:54, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image:American Civil War Battles by Theater, Year.png

Thanks for the comments. The next thing I would like to do with the map is turn it into an imagemap, so that when you click on a county or state, it lists all the battles in that county or state, but that'll have to wait till Wikipedia supports such features. Another future possibility would be to use a map that accurately depicts counties, states, and territories back then, although those boundaries changed all the time. --brian0918™ 03:06, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Infotainment

I dislike the move, if only because the title is long. And anyway shouldnt it be 'Soft news and infotainment'? The terms hard news/soft news can be debated in place of Journalism/infotainment, but a common treatment assumes there isnt going to be enough in the infotaiment article, which is not the case at all. Do you see the inverted emphasis? I understand the desire to make distinctions, but the article is section material, not article material. Id like to restore the infotainment article, and you can make the contrast article a section within it if you like. I think it would be quite appropriate, unless there is enough material to justify a contrast article between two discrete things. An article that contrasts two things is rare enough here, but three things is better dealt with as discrete elements in context of discrete articles. Regards, -SV|t|add 01:36, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Well, I thought that there was really no point in discussing hard news and soft news separately...soft news and infotainment...refer to more or less the same thing."

I dont disagree with the focus, just that it shouldnt replace the discrete article. Otherwise its just an arguement over the title of infotainment and softnews, with hard news going to journalism, eh?

"Whether or not article titled "infotainment" is necessary, I'm not sure, especially since it has negative POV connotations. Certainly the industries of entertainment news, human interest reporting, home and garden shows, etc. deserve coverage, but I would expect them to have their own articles. What sort of content were you thinking should be added to "infotainment" itself?"

I would add precisely the material youre writing, some or all of it, depending on how deep it is, in a section within infotainment. Its a controversial term, sure, but so are a lot of terms-based articles. "Negative POV connotations" doesnt work if its a well-used term, and this certianly is one. You could argue the case for "soft news" but that only works in contrast with hard news" The point is to appropriately detail what these discrete concepts are, (using the most common terms for titles) and under that framework treat the relationships, differences, etc to other topics. You wouldnt redirect journalism to a treatment on what constitutes journalism vis a vis infotainment, would you? :) If the question is "is there enough material to justify an infotainment article - then yes, if only by (proper) inclusion of your this, this and that article. The relationship treatments have to be subordinate to the greater discrete articles, and those need to adress development in the others. In this case, the relationsip treatment might outpace the main, but thats just because Ive been busy. ;) Regards -SV|t|add 02:18, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Dahl Book

So how did you like How Democratic is the American Constitution? I agree with Dahl that the Senate is egregiously undemocratic. I also think it's a joke that small states might need a senate so that the big states don't gang up on them.

A great (and the only, AFAIK) survey of how small states abuse their disproportionate power in the Senate is "Sizing Up the Senate: The Unequal Consequences of Equal Representation." It's thanks to the Senate that we have Wyoming getting $37 per person for Homeland Security and California getting ~ $5. Dinopup 12:18, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

It's funny that you mentioned that Congressmen are more into pork barrel work than Senators. One of the most interesting findings of Sizing Up the Senate is that small state senators tend to operate in the Senate exactly the way Congressmen operate in the House. Small state Senators tend to sit on Committees that do constituent service (like Appropriations) whereas large state Senators tend to sit on committees that conduct affairs of national importance. Since 1947, the Senators on Appropriations have come from states with an average of 5.29 Congressmen, since 1947, the Senators on Energy and Public Works have come from states with 3.29 Congressmen, the Senators on Veterans Affairs come from states with an average of 4.61 Congressmen, and the Senators on Commerce have come from states with an average of 6.18 Congressmen. By contrast, the Senators on Foreign Relations, Small Business, Labor, and Banking, come from states with an average of 7.63 to 8.89 Congressmen.

If a vote in the Senate is going to be close, small state Senators are much more likely than big state Senators to hold out in hope of getting something for their state. Lee and Oppenheimer analyze over thirty votes that were delayed because of hold outs and find that small state Senators were the ones holding out over half the time. If a big state and small state Senator are both holding out, the small state Senator is more likely to be the one rewarded, since a reward to his state is less expensive than a reward to a large state Senator. One egregious example fo this happening recently was James Jeffords holding out on the prescription drug bill. He voted for it after HHS agreed to subsidize Burlington, VT hospitals the same amount they paid Boston, MA hospitals for labor costs.

Many people say that the Senate products rural interests, but that is false, it merely products people who live in small states. Essex County, New York is as rural as Essex County, Vermont, yet it is only Essex County, Vermont that is privileged. Also, what is rational about giving half the West Coast representation equal to the metropolitan area of Providence?

I agree with you that the Senate apportionment scheme is unchangeable, but I hope we can change the terms of debate. Perhaps the Senate could be weakened? Perhaps the power to confirm judges could be given to the House? or perhaps we could restrict the Senate's power over appropriations?

It is possible that this issue will rise in prominence in the next few decades. Every census since 1790 has revealed that more and more of our population is concentrated in a few states. In 1790, half of the Senate was elected by ~33% of the population. In 2000 half of the Senate was elected by 17% of the population.

It won't be long before we can speak of Wyoming, Vermont, and North Dakota as rotten boroughs. Dinopup 14:48, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Stub sorting bot

I have put a proposal for a bot to help stub sorting at Wikipedia:Bot requests#Stub_sorting_bot. The task seems well suited to Pearle. Susvolans (pigs can fly) 17:14, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

lots of edits, not an admin

Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 23:02, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)

tl:Stylehowto

Hi there! What's the status on deprecating this template? It passed TFD without objections, but hasn't been deleted yet as it seems in use. Radiant_>|< 09:20, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Comic creators

Hello Beland, thanks for getting back to me. I didn't answer to you earlier because we were in a overwhelming discussion about the issue. This request has eventually been removed and something else has been proposed. Thanks. Lvr 10:56, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

WP:CU

You are an evil, evil man or woman. =) Here's to making Azerbaijani literature shine! · Katefan0^(scribble) 15:53, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

New categories list

Hi there! You said on WP:VP that you could create a list of new cats from the monthly database dump. If it's not too much trouble I'd really appreciate that. Yours, Radiant_>|< 11:56, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

non-empty redirected categories

Hi - Does your orphaned category scanner currently also scan for non-empty "redirected" categories. Since {{categoryredirect}} doesn't prevent anyone from adding members to a "soft redirected" category I'd be willing to bet at least some of them occasionally end up with miscategorized articles. Finding such occurrences seems like an ideal job for a tool. Come to think of it, it might be useful to have a list of categories folks try to "hard redirect" (with #REDIRECT) as well. Perhaps related to this, Category:Wikipedia category redirects has been listed at WP:CFD. If you know for sure whether the 500 limit for whatslinkhere is in the database (vs. just a display artifact), could you please comment at WP:CFD? Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:22, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Pearle request

Hi Beland, I was wondering if you could spare Pearle for a slew of category moves that I can't do manually? I've listed them at WP:CFD under "To be emptied or moved". The only one that can't be moved yet is Category:Causes célèbres, as it's been already listed for undeletion. If you can do this I'd really appreciate it. Thanks. --Kbdank71 16:23, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Beland, hi again. I hate to bug you about this, but I don't run a bot and you do. Same deal as yesterday. "To be emptied or moved" is filled again. If you can't do this also, that's ok. If you can, and there is anything I can help out with, please let me know. Thanks much. --Kbdank71 18:07, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Auto-categorization/Wikipedia namespace

Has this project died? Should it be listed on Template:Active Wiki Fixup Projects anymore? --Tagishsimon (talk)

poll

Poll (Macedonian Slav or Macedonian) I hope that this message is of interest to you, if not please accept my apologies. There is a poll in the talk page of the 'Macedonian Slavs' article here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Macedonian_Slavs#The_poll

Some people are lobbying for changing the article's name to Macedonians without any qualifier. As it seems, a number of these people come from the Macedonian/Macedonian Slav wikipedia project. It seemed only fair to attract the attention of people that _possibly_ share or represent a different point of view. Your contributions to the discussion and the poll are welcomed.