Jump to content

User talk:Sam: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 49: Line 49:
::: Yes, subst: runs. I can generate a chain of phisical gerarchical categories on a page. To work with +incategory, an item has to be categorized into all ancestor categories too: I can do this, the only trouble is that categories are phisically written into the page, and have to be deleted by a human or a bot user if there's some mistake.
::: Yes, subst: runs. I can generate a chain of phisical gerarchical categories on a page. To work with +incategory, an item has to be categorized into all ancestor categories too: I can do this, the only trouble is that categories are phisically written into the page, and have to be deleted by a human or a bot user if there's some mistake.
::: Ok, there's matter to do some tests. Come into it.source if you are interested about! --[[User:Alex_brollo|Alex_brollo]] [[User_talk:Alex_brollo|Talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Alex_brollo|Contrib]] 21:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
::: Ok, there's matter to do some tests. Come into it.source if you are interested about! --[[User:Alex_brollo|Alex_brollo]] [[User_talk:Alex_brollo|Talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Alex_brollo|Contrib]] 21:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
:::: Some more detail about my "catwords" idea.
:::: Categories are built as groups and more-and-more detailed subgroups. If you want to use +incategory to obtain a good list of all related objects, you have to categorize any object into the more detailed category '''and''' into all its ancestor categories. I.e: an Category:Equitation book has to be listed too into Category:Essays and into Category:Literature into a topic axis, and, if it is written into 1602, is has to be listes into Category:1602 books and into Category:XVII century books into a time axis, if your aim is to find it with +incategory into any intesection of topic axis and time axis. I built a trick to write phisically into the page all the list of the ancestor categories simply mentioning the most detailed one; my previous tests with categories which weren't phisically written into the text, but simply linked "on the fly" by a template didn't run.
:::: I hope, I've been a little bit clearer.... :-( --[[User:Alex_brollo|Alex_brollo]] [[User_talk:Alex_brollo|Talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Alex_brollo|Contrib]] 08:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
--[[User:Alex_brollo|Alex_brollo]] [[User_talk:Alex_brollo|Talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Alex_brollo|Contrib]] 08:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:30, 6 April 2009

Template:Werdnabot

Bear Mountain Bridge

Please participate on talk page of Bear Mountain Bridge regarding your restoration of section concerning the mysterious "material" applied to cables.
The section you have restored needs some serious and significant improvement and reasonable justification --- or deletion (again).

Calamitybrook (talk) 18:45, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated List of longest suspension bridge spans for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks, where editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Scorpion0422 04:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of gamelan ensembles in the United States

I'm not sure if you haven't seen my edit summaries and talk page comments or not. This is a simple and blatant case of WP:SPAM - links added to an article for promotion rather than as sources. Please join the talk page discussions. Thanks! --Ronz (talk) 00:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting to discuss the situation. You didn't indicate you'd seen my edit summaries, so I'm emphasizing some of the information in them as a start.
I've edited many such lists this way, and feel very familiar with the applicable policies and guidelines. I'm also very familiar with the reactions that occur when linkspam is removed from such articles, especially for the first time. No offense, but this is all very routine for me. I think consensus on such links is crystal clear - they are not appropriate. --Ronz (talk) 01:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you review WP:BATTLE concerning, "Please discuss this without throwing Wiki-abbreviations around. It is unreasonable to expect people to read pages and pages of guidelines to understand why you think they apply here. And after all, they are just guidelines and we should ignore all rules when they go against the pillars of Wikipedia. So explain to me how this list, as it is, is harmful and contrary to the pillars of Wikipedia." Instead, it would be helpful if you would demonstrate that you've actually read the relevant policies and guidelines yourself, perhaps quoting or otherwise clarifying your interpretation of them. --Ronz (talk) 16:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for keeping the discussion on topic! --Ronz (talk) 21:47, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Simple suspension bridge

Hi. I have been expanding Simple suspension bridge and also cleaning up some related articles, Wikipedia categories, and categories on Commons; take a look? --Una Smith (talk) 04:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suspension bridge

Hi, your are listed in WikiProject Bridges and I wondered if you might want to weigh in on a requested move? There is a discussion here Talk:Suspension_bridge_types#Requested_move which results from a previous move. The discussion has major consequences on the content of the main article on suspension bridges? The root question: Is a suspended deck bridge the proper name for a typical suspension bridge? - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 02:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request to userfy CMS Made Simple

Hello Sam,

the article I have written about CMS Made Simple was nominated for speedy deletion and already deleted.

As I understood from talk with DoriSmith http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DoriSmith#CMS_Made_Simple_deleted there is a possibility to get the copy of the deleted article. I have made custom translation for it from German http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMS_made_simple and it took time for me to do it, could you please give me a copy of it or recover the translation in any way?

My mistake was choosing the same username as the article itself, but I am not a developer of the project and not involved in the development. I am just an advanced user of CMS Made Simple and had no better idea for username. I am not sure now if I have to register with Wikipedia again and choose another username for new submission through AFD to avoid treating as spam again. Do you think it would be better to register with another username?

CMS Made Simple is not an exotic CMS, it has already won a packt Best PHP Based Open Source Award in 2008 http://www.packtpub.com/article/2008-best-php-open-source-cms-drupal and it's a pity that no information about this CMS can be found in Wikipedia.

Thank you for your reply, Sonya CMS Made Simple (talk) 07:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A doubt about incategory

Hi Sam, I found your name as a contributor of Incategory article. I'm very interested about, but some tests into it.source are disappointing, since +incategory seems to work only with "hard" categories (those written as [[Category:...]] into the code of the page) but not with "soft" categories, coming from the transclusion of a template. If this is true, most of a project I'm working about is to be done from scratch. Is this a known limitation of incategory tool? Are you deep into this matter, or do you know who is? Thanks!

--Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 15:45, 31 March 2009 (UTC) (mainly active here: s:it:User talk:Alex brollo )[reply]

Thanks for the link to CatScan, but we were thinking about a very bold projecy founded on +incategory plus a neat trick to work with "catwords" (t.i. Category-Keywords). Nevertheless Catscan seems an excellent tool for admin purpouses. We'll study some other trick (probably something with subst: to create "hard" categories). --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 21:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, subst: runs. I can generate a chain of phisical gerarchical categories on a page. To work with +incategory, an item has to be categorized into all ancestor categories too: I can do this, the only trouble is that categories are phisically written into the page, and have to be deleted by a human or a bot user if there's some mistake.
Ok, there's matter to do some tests. Come into it.source if you are interested about! --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 21:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some more detail about my "catwords" idea.
Categories are built as groups and more-and-more detailed subgroups. If you want to use +incategory to obtain a good list of all related objects, you have to categorize any object into the more detailed category and into all its ancestor categories. I.e: an Category:Equitation book has to be listed too into Category:Essays and into Category:Literature into a topic axis, and, if it is written into 1602, is has to be listes into Category:1602 books and into Category:XVII century books into a time axis, if your aim is to find it with +incategory into any intesection of topic axis and time axis. I built a trick to write phisically into the page all the list of the ancestor categories simply mentioning the most detailed one; my previous tests with categories which weren't phisically written into the text, but simply linked "on the fly" by a template didn't run.
I hope, I've been a little bit clearer.... :-( --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 08:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 08:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]