User:Auroranorth/Coaching

Auroranorth (talk · contribs · count)

Coaching

Hi

I'd like to train with your Coaching program but your page doesn't exactly detail how I got about signing up. Could you sign me up, please, and give me my first task? One of my goals is to become an admin and gain back my credibility lost in a recent scuffle.

Thanks, Auroranorth 12:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm kind of overloaded on students, but I like your initiative and candor, so I will be glad to make time for you. I do have a few conditions though, and they are that you...

1. watch your coaching page closely, and reply to every post there in a timely fashion. And when you post there, please drop a quick note on my talk page, so the new messages alarm is activated.
2. complete all the assignments you are given to the best of your ability. If you have trouble with an assignment, by all means, let me know, so we can discuss possible solutions and options.
3. take to heart the advice provided by my fellow coaches and your fellow students (this will be a group effort)
4. don't go for your RfA or accept an RfA nomination until I think you are ready. I take pride in nominating my students personally, and I find that the RfA process goes more smoothly when I coordinate any co-nominators (refer them to me) and make the post.

Please let me know if you agree, and we can get started.
I look forward to your reply.
The Transhumanist    15:33, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Auroranorth 12:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Sounds excellent! Let's get started. Please note that I am normally on Wikipedia from 9:00UTC and 12:00UTC, but I may be on other times. Auroranorth 01:21, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, it's going to be a long road, but I'll stick at it! It might take up to a day to reply, remember. Auroranorth 01:39, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I do not expect to be nominated until at least the beginning of next year. This is because of a recent block to do with image copyrights and sockpuppetry (see User:Auroranorth/Sockpuppets for more). However, I would like to still train until that time. Thanks, Auroranorth 09:24, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

So, by "sounds excellent", you mean that you agree?

It's hard to say at this point, but I wouldn't set your heart on adminship. It may take years after your probabtion is over to undue the damage done to your reputation. That is, your reputation as perceived in RfA (they're much more critical of past performance there than on the rest of the wiki).

But don't worry about it. Adminship is overrated. Building the encyclopedia, rather than merely maintaining it, is underrated. Become the best editor you can be, and adminship may naturally follow. But by that point, you probably won't care for adminship.

The important thing to focus on is the encyclopedia itself: building its navigation structures, contributing article content, copy-editing existing text, and tracking down references. That is, concentrate on how users can access the articles, the article titles, and the text in the articles (especially references).

Therefore, our central focus will be on the structure of Wikipedia: it's navigation structure and the structure of knowledge itself. That will expose you to the entire scope of human knowledge and endeavor. If you stick with it, you'll become familiar with how things in general are related, that is, with the BIG PICTURE. That's a pretty interesting vantage point. From there, you can determine how you may best contribute to the world through Wikipedia. But without a feel for the whole, you might never discover that which would be most important to you.

As you become more familiar with this structure over time, I'll give you additional (simultaneous) assignments dealing with article titles, article contents, Wikipedia policy, etc.

Are you ready?

The Transhumanist 20:39, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi

I'd like to train with your Coaching program but your page doesn't exactly detail how I got about signing up. Could you sign me up, please, and give me my first task? One of my goals is to become an admin and gain back my credibility lost in a recent scuffle.

I am starting to think that maybe the RfA should be in August. I hope. Auroranorth 23:44, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

This meaning, I agree, let's get started, but please do not nominate me for adminship until mid-2008. Thanks, Auroranorth 00:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Let the coaching begin...

First, some feedback. Concerning your indentation style (on your talk page), please see Wikipedia:Guide to good indentation.

For your first assignment, I would like you to track down a physical copy of the Propædia. (It's Encyclopedia Brittanica's Outline of Knowledge). Study it carefully, including what Mortimer J. Adler had to say about it. The most likely place to find it, would be your local library. Check it out if you can. If not, study it in place. I would like you to get to know it like the back of your hand. The Transhumanist   

Hmm... OK, but it might take a while. My local library isn't that extensive. Auroranorth 05:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

If your library is part of a system, then you can have books transferred via holds. Then there's interlibrary loans, which makes books available from all over the country. You might be in more than one library system's territory, such as city and county. And don't forget universities and colleges, as they usually have excellent libraries. If you are in high school, I'd be surprised if its library didn't have Britannica. Friends, family, etc. Shouldn't be that hard to track down. Good luck. The Transhumanist    02:20, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Eek - if I get out the Propaedia now I can have it for the whole holidays, starting this Friday. Thanks! Auroranorth 09:20, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I still haven't tracked down the Propaedia yet, but will do soon. Don't worry about the WikiBreak sign: that just says I have something else important on! Auroranorth 03:07, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, I have looked at the Propaedia fairly closely and believe I am ready to let you know. I have not taken the book out (it is reference - cannot be removed), so if I need it again it may take a long time. Auroranorth 10:47, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Now that you've seen the Propædia, tell me about it. Also, in what ways did you find it significant? The Transhumanist    10:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Well then. It contained references to the Britannica's Macropedia and Micropedia (sorry cannot bring myself to use the ae). It was in memory of Mortimer J Adler (the edition I saw was later than the one I believe you were thinking of - Adler was dead when it was published) and dedicated to George W Bush and Queen Elizabeth II. It was similar to an expanded index of the Britannica, and the 'prelude' said that it helped people who wanted to study a topic in detail find the topic in the Macropedia/Micropedia. It was split into many different chapters or sections and the human body section actually had a few plastic sheets forming layers to look through the components of the human body, which I liked and spent a while looking at. In the prelude it said that each section had an 'essay' at its beginning before moving onto the 'main' parts. Each section was written by a large amount of authors. OK, is that what you wanted there? I did it entirely from my own memory, and didn't look at the book while writing this, in print or on the internet. Auroranorth 10:23, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

What would you say its essence is? And... in addition to it being a reference aid to the Britannica, how would you describe its utility (usefulness)? The Transhumanist    10:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I would say the Propaedia is useful to those who are doing a high school assignment. It is only scratching the surface. The Macro/Micropedia both go into greater detail. Auroranorth 10:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

You didn't mention what you thought it was in essence. Also, what did it only scratch the surface of? The Transhumanist    10:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Could you please elaborate on 'essence'? In the simplest terms, it's a book that acts as the Encyclopedia Britannica's index or as I have noted on the Wikipedia article, table of contents. I also agree with its secondary 'title', the Outline of Knowledge. It simply outlines the important things that we know. The Propaedia scratched the surface of the Britannica. It's similar to education: primary school gives a very broad view on everything (but does not delve into the topics deeply), late secondary school begins to go deeper and university focuses on one topic (in essence - although there are minors and majors, etc.), however broad it is. Auroranorth 10:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it goes beyond being merely an index to Britannica, in that it is an outline of all of human knowledge. That's the answer I was looking for. I'm glad that key point didn't escape your notice. Why would someone use the outline instead of the alphabetical index? The Transhumanist    10:52, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The alphabetical index may just give a volume number and page number, whilst the outline actually gives a 'brief' overview of the topic - similar to the lead section in a Wikipedia article (in an indirect way). Auroranorth 10:55, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

And it also shows how topics are related to each other. That is, it provides a structure, in which broad subjects are broken down into smaller subjects. A tree of knowledge. The Big Picture. By studying it, you can see how things hang together. Once you've identified an area of interest, the outline provides a breakdown of all the subjects in that area. It's especially useful to those who do not know exactly what they are looking for. It lets you see what's out there. Please identify the corresponding features of Wikipedia. The Transhumanist    11:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

(restart indentation)

OK. Let me see... There is the broad matter of Wikipedia:Contents, then List of overviews. The lists of basic topics could also be counted too. Auroranorth 11:34, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:Categorical index also attempts to do so, and the List of academic disciplines is another outline of knowledge, while the page Lists of topics attempts to organize all of Wikipedia's lists into such an outline. What do you make of Wikipedia's various outlines of knowledge? The Transhumanist    11:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I honestly never use them. I find searching much easier, as I can search for the article I want, and those lists are not up-to-date to the minute. Auroranorth 11:52, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I think you missed the point. What a person wants is based upon what they already know. That is, you can't want what you don't even know exists. If you don't know about chocolate, you can't all of a sudden desire it. Outlines of knowledge aren't for looking up specific things. They're designed for exploring when you don't know (or don't remember) what your options are. The Transhumanist    12:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I thought by 'what do you make of them', you meant what I thought about them, and how I use them. I completely agree with you over chocolate - nice example. Auroranorth 12:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, now it's time to criticize the hell out of them. What's wrong with Wikipedia's outlines of knowledge? The Transhumanist    12:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

They don't talk about everything, they aren't up to date and do not cover some vital articles. Auroranorth 12:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

What did you notice was missing? The Transhumanist    12:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

One key loss I saw was the absence of environment(al) geography - how we affect our planet. Auroranorth 12:35, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Environmental geography is listed under human geography in the List of basic geography topics. I just noticed that the article on environmental geography is just a stub. Would you like to expand it? The Transhumanist    12:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Not really. I don't know enough about it. Right now I am looking at Australian television, but I am on shaky ground right now. See WT:PERTH if you want to know about what happened (you asked on my talk page about it, but I am not at liberty to discuss such matters!) Auroranorth 13:00, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

It takes me from 3 to 8 hours to create a basic topic list on a subject I'm unfamiliar with. The Transhumanist    13:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it's not a list but an article. No thanks. Auroranorth 12:12, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

As a side note, on your JS user design page (for monobook.js), I suggest you put WP:TW in there - I use it for vandal fighting and it cuts down the time to about a half, but you can only use it on Firefox (which I rarely use). Auroranorth 13:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

(restart indentation)

True, but we don't have a list either. You could create one. As for articles I'm unfamiliar with, it only takes a few hours to get familiar enough with them to write about them. Google isn't there for nothing. The Transhumanist    21:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

No thank you, I am working on Australian articles at present. Auroranorth 01:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Have fun. The Transhumanist    17:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Are we still doing coaching? I would like to. Auroranorth 02:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Sure. Keeping the Propaedia in mind, look over Lists of basic topics, and browse through the various lists, filling in gaps that you can as you find them. The Transhumanist    04:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... I don't quite understand. I think it has just about everything the Propaedia has... Auroranorth 05:49, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Browse the lists (click on them and look them over), not just the main list. There's lots of stuff missing. The Transhumanist    06:02, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll have a look... Auroranorth 06:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Could you please show me one example? I am still having some difficulty. Auroranorth 06:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Most of the lists are incomplete. See List of basic culture topics. The last three sections are empty! The section for basic concepts has only 4 terms in it. Look over one list at a time on Lists of basic topics, until you see something missing, and then jump right in. You can add them from your own expertise, or you can browse related articles and gather them up from there. Another approach is to hunt down glossaries on each subject on the Web, and pick out the basic terms. Then add them to the basic list on that subject. Or you could get ambitious, and add new lists (there are lots of topics missing that need their own lists). The Transhumanist    06:46, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, I am doing some now. Don't expect something great here: adding lists isn't really my strong spot! Auroranorth 06:58, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Completed most of List of basic geography topics. Auroranorth 07:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Alright then. I have done most of the things I actually have any vague idea about - wow, I didn't know so much 'stuff' existed! ...Can we move off these lists now? It is getting pretty... detailed. Auroranorth 07:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm trying to show that these lists present the structure of knowledge, and hence provide structure to Wikipedia. As such, familiarity with these lists equates to familiarity with Wikipedia's contents. Acquiring familiarity takes more than one session. Please dip in to these lists from time to time, and you'll find your understanding of knowledge and how it all fits together improving.  ;) The Transhumanist    07:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice job on List of basic geography topics#History of geography. The Transhumanist    08:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Next we move on to project management on Wikipedia. One key element of project management is attracting editors to work on a given project. That is, recruiting. The Lists of basic topics are in serious need of attention. One person can spend years on them and still not finish. But an army of editors could make short work of it. We need to place notices in all the right places. Can you guess what those might be? The Transhumanist    07:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

How about WikiProject Cleanup, the Village Pump or the Community Portal? Auroranorth 07:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Good guesses. It's not cleanup exactly, but development. The WP:CBB on the Community Portal is one place, and a permanent link on the Community Portal itself (as you seemed to imply). The Village Pump has a subpage to ask for assistance, so that would work too, but would need to be repeated periodically (once a month perhaps). WP:RD and WP:HD are places to ask for help, so periodic notices may work there as well. Another large group of pages are subject-based WikiProjects -- a permanent notice can be placed on each project which corresponds with a basic topic list. It could be made a standard section of WikiProject page format. Many Wikipedians are listed in categories by interest, many also sign up as members on WikiProject pages. They can be contacted for each topic. The next step is to compose the notices. The Transhumanist    08:09, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not too good at syntax, but here is a plain old notice:

Wikipedia is in trouble!

Wikipedia's core structure, the Lists of basic topics is in need of your help. To get started, sign up page name here!

This template could be used for any list; like 'WikiProject Geography is in trouble... (link to Geography lists) Auroranorth 11:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think the Chicken Little "The Sky is Falling" approach is a little over the top. We should be positive rather than negative. Otherwise, the notice is fine. The Transhumanist    21:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Geography for the notice I placed there. The Transhumanist    21:52, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I can see that, it is good. Auroranorth 03:26, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I've also added "adopt a basic topic list" task to the things to do list on the Community Portal. As for contacting all the relevant WikiProjects, we should wait to see how WikiProject Geography responds. I've contacted one of its active members (based on his contributions), and hopefully he'll pick up the ball and run with it and rally his fellow project members to the cause. In the meantime, we could check Category:Wikipedians for a cat on geog. The Transhumanist    03:32, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

We could try Category:Wikipedians by Wikipedia collaboration. Auroranorth 03:53, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be anything on Geography. Oh well. By the way, here's a fun article you might enjoy: Wonders of the World. The Transhumanist    04:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Complete? - I believe these would fit under other headings - 'prehistory' under history, etc. Auroranorth 04:22, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Okies. What is my next assignment? Auroranorth 05:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Recruiting, of course. One hundred or more editors to work on the basic topic system would be nice. Serving as a table of contents, the basic topics system has become a central or core part of Wikipedia. Therefore, its development and maintainance should also be core. So, we need to set up a structure (of links) to funnel volunteers (editors) to these pages. The standard way of attracting volunteers is by creating and running a WikiProject. So that's your assignment. Create a WikiProject for basic topics and attract as many editors as you can to join it. If you need any hints on how to accomplish these things, please let me know.  :-) Good luck. The Transhumanist    06:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... unfortunately I cannot edit project namespace pages (i.e. cannot create a WikiProject). Is there possibly another task? Auroranorth 06:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

But you can edit in the talk namespace. Therefore, you could post notice templates on article talk pages. Most WikiProject work, such as article editing and editor recruiting, is done in the main namespace (and on its discussion pages). You can also post to the user namespace. Do you have AWB? The Transhumanist    07:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

No, unfortunately I have not been approved to use AWB. Auroranorth 11:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

It's useful but not mandatory for this assignment. The Transhumanist    04:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

How can I recruit people to a project that doesn't exist? Auroranorth 06:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Patience is still a virtue these days, isn't it?  :-) I plan on creating one, but I'm swamped at the moment. Give me a day or two. In the meantime, you can draft the notice templates that you will be using. The Transhumanist    06:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll wait for you! Auroranorth 10:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Here it is: Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists of basic topics

On retrospect, rather than have you post the banners the hard way, I just went ahead and posted them with WP:AWB. I forgot how fun using that is. It sure racks up edits fast! The Transhumanist    09:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for my late reply - I am busy on weekdays. Thanks for that - what is the next assignment? Auroranorth 12:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not letting you get off the hook that easy! I've made a request for you at WP:AWB, as your coach. It usually takes a day or two to get approved or denied. In the meantime, please get more familiar with the lists listed on Lists of basic topics, by working on them. Many of them need external links, see also links, leaders/scholars, basic topics, etc. Also, please add them all to your watchlist, so you can track changes to them. We should watch to see how many people start editing them based on our recruiting efforts. We're the only ones overseeing the lot. It's good training in WikiProject management. :-) The Transhumanist    00:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how good the tabbing features on IE are, but the Linky extension for Firefox turbocharges that browser's tabbing capability. If you don't have it, please get it, and try it out. See my tools page (accessible from my menu on my user page) for details on rapid page viewing using tabs.

Would you like to join the lists of basic topics WikiProject? If so, I'd be happy to sign you up. The Transhumanist    01:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Even though you can't participate in the discussions at WP:FLC, you can certainly help fix the problems pointed out in those discussions. I've nominated 3 basic topic lists for featured list status, and the discussions are turning into pretty good task lists on how to improve those lists. These lists will pave the way for more lists from the basic topic list collection to receive featured list status, and will provide better standards for these lists which can then form the basis of a set of instructions on how to build and develop lists of this type. You should monitor the discussions, because this is one of the most important areas of development on Wikipedia. The structure and quality of its navigation system not only affects how easily a user unfamiliar with a subject can find the topics he didn't know he needed, but it also affects an understanding of the subject directly, by presenting a model of the subject (in the form of an outline or overview). Wikipedia's navigation system, particularly its ability to help users find their way around, is a key factor in the quality of Wikipedia as a whole, a factor which has been for the most part ignored or missed by all but a handful of editors dedicated to its development. Knowledge can't be useful to you if you don't know it exists. Access is power. If you wish to contribute to Wikipedia in the highest impact way, helping to develop these lists may be it. The Transhumanist    09:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Because you are under my supervision, you've been approved for WP:AWB. Please seek comment and approval from me first on any tasks you wish to use it for. But I think you will be kept busy with your upcoming assignments. Keep in mind that the approach taken with AWB is the opposite of single edits. "Be bold" does not apply to AWB. Making sweeping bold changes with AWB will only piss off lots of people. Those who make unwanted changes are usually the ones who have to clean it up. It is critical that you discuss with others what you want to do and reach a consensus before you start. Once you get a feel for what is and is not acceptable to the community, then you won't need to worry about this as much, such as when using it on standard tasks like placing WikiProject banners on article talk pages. A key rule to live by with AWB is not to guess. When in doubt, discuss it out. But for now, stick to assignments, but feel free to make requests.

The first thing I need you to do is download WP:AWB, extract it to a directory, and run it. Look it over. And study the User Manual. When you are ready for your first AWB assignment, let me know. The Transhumanist    22:19, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

For a good resource on how to manage wikiprojects, see User:The Transhumanist/Virtual classroom/Coaching/Phoenix-wiki. The Transhumanist 18:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

New home for your coaching discussions

Right here.  :)

Using our talk pages was nice because of the message alerts, but now it's time to switch over to using Wikipedia's watchlist feature. If you aren't already in the habit of using it every time you log on, and frequently while you are on, please get into the habit of doing so.

A tool you can use in one of your windows is Lupin's tool. It can monitor changes to your watchlisted articles in real-time. Check out my tools page for details.

The Transhumanist    11:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: blocks

I can hardly believe you got yourself blocked again.

That sucks.

No wonder you were missing.  :)

You did well on your AWB assignment. But your AWB access has been removed because of your abuse of TW. I've put in a request to restore AWB, since you didn't abuse it, but you'll probably need to pledge to follow others' instructions for awhile rather than go off and do things on your own.

We need to focus your activities down to those which you know well enough not to get into trouble, and expand your wikiskill set from there. You should clear your actions with more experienced users until you have a better feel for the project, and once others have acquired confidence in your abilities.

How does this sound? Is this something you would like to try?

The Transhumanist    11:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

What happened?

Please tell me your side of the story. Once you are done, I'll give you some advice. The Transhumanist 11:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi TT, my side of the story is just about the same as everybody else's. I do think I needed a warning before a block but it expires soon anyway. Looks like I won't be using AWB anyway. I agree with your proposal - some good ideas there. Thanks for your help, I look forward to working with you soon. Auroranorth 12:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I haven't heard anybody's side of the story, so somebody needs to fill me in, to save me from having to pore through your many contributions. Your talk page reveals that there was a problem, but doesn't make it clear exactly what the problem was. Please describe your activities you were using TW for, and tell me which actions got you in trouble, and which ones didn't.

To get your AWB access back, all you need to do is get 500 more edits in the main namespace, without causing any problems, and they'll be happy to reregister you. In the meantime, we'll have to make do with conventional tools.

When your block is over, I want you to switch over to using Firefox. Does it work on your computer? On its tools menu, select "extensions", and there's an option on there for downloading new extensions. Download "Linky". If you can't find it, there's a link to it on my tools page. Make sure you download it with Firefox.

After you've downloaded Linky (it installs automatically), exit Firefox and run it again. You'll be using it to finish the external links sections assignment I gave you. Read the rapid browsing instructions on my tools page. Go to my sandbox page that lists the basic lists, and run Linky on it. It'll scan that page for links, and will load the page from each link into a seperate tab each. In the the current tab (the page displayed on your screen), check the external links section of that page. If that section is full, close the tab (Ctrl-F4). The next tab will be displayed. Keep checking the external links sections until you come to one that isn't full. Fill it as you did the ones you completed a week ago. The Transhumanist 02:48, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Block

Hi TT, I would like to give you the full story with full diff links, etc.

I was originally using the Twinkle application to patrol Recent Changes. This included fighting vandalism (reversion, warning), reverting editing tests (reversion, warning) and tagging pages for speedy deletion (warning). I reverted an edit by Circuit Judge to his puppeteer's archive page. I then warned Circuit Judge on his talk page, which previously redirected to User:Circuit Judge. Circuit Judge (Porcupine) reverted my warning and then added Circuit Judge as a sockpuppet to SSP. Circuit Judge (Porcupine) then exchanged words with me and I replied (on his talk page). Basically, we kept talking on each other's talk pages (see my talk page and his talk page). My final comment was removed. But to continue, I reported Porcupine as a sockpuppeteer (using Porcupine's name, not Circuit Judge's) and Porcupine began to become a little uncivil (see this) and Porcupine tagged his own sockpuppetry case for speedy deletion. As this was transcluded onto WP:SSP, SSP was also tagged for speedy deletion. I removed the template and warned Porcupine for vandalism, and he in turn replaced the tag and warned me (see here). I was told to stop pursuing the matter by Gnangarra and I told Circuit Judge (Porcupine) that I would no longer talk to him. He talked to me again and I repeated the message. He removed the notices.

Then I warned W.naidu, Exist 709 and Ozymandiasza. That's what chiefly got me blocked.

Does that give you the information you need? Auroranorth 08:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Thank you. You lack discernment. That's normal, and everyone lacks it before they have it, and everyone continues to lack it to some degree. You lack discernment between mistakes and vandalism. You also are having a hard time telling valid edits from vandalism. To be able to tell the difference between mistakes and vandalism, you will need to become generally more familiar with Wikipedia's operations, and that will come with time. To be able to recognize valid edits, you need to be able to empathize with contributors, and that comes with experience contributing to articles yourself.

The most effective way to understand contributors is to become one. Beside your assignments assignments/coaching, I would like you to stick to writing (composing) articles (including stand-alone lists) for the next few months. See Wikipedia:Article development. Don't argue with anyone. Don't revert anyone. If someone reverts you, don't revert it back. Instead, try to understand why he reverted it. If the reason for the edit is not obvious, and you don't completely understand his edit summary, or it is unclear, ask him to explain why he reverted you. Then work on something else, in the same article or in another. Don't start discussions that are not directly concerned with either the articles you are working on or your assignments assignments/coaching. Your goal is to become "invisible". This will probably not happen right away, as it is not easy. When your edits are good enough that nobody reverts you and nobody complains on an article talk page or on your talk page, you will effectively be invisible (or at least it will feel that way). Invisible editors get a lot more done. Eventually, as your reputation grows by virtue of your name being associated with quality edits in edit histories, your invisibility will wear off as people begin to contact you about various things (for your assistance, expert advice, awarding you with barnstars, etc.). If you can't think of articles to work on, switch to reading. Pretty soon, you'll find something that interests you. Good luck, and have fun. The Transhumanist    06:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello - it sounds like you're going to break off contact. I think you should still give me feedback, though! Auroranorth 06:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, yes, and the card I am about to give you. Auroranorth 07:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Break off contact? Drop a student?! Hell no!!! On the contrary, I intend to keep you very busy.  :-) Note that above I said "beside your assignments".  :-) It would have been clearer if I had said "besides your coaching". I do plan on taking a wikibreak eventually, at which time I will be breaking off contact with everyone, not just you in particular. But I'm in a couple major discussions right now (at WP:LISTS & WP:CONTENTS) and can't break away from Wikipedia just yet. Don't worry, when I do, you'll have plenty of assignments to keep you occupied, and I have cocoaches who are always happy to fill in for me. I've fixed my post above, to make it clearer, and I'm sorry if I caused you wikistress. :-) The Transhumanist    18:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Current discussion and assignment

Am I going in the right direction with List of basic literature topics? Auroranorth 07:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I have completed the external links assignment. Remember I did some in October, so there may not be all of them in my contribs, etc. Auroranorth 09:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Did you use Linky and tabbing? Powerful combination, isn't it. I often find it faster than using AWB, such as for supporting manual editting, because tabbing is more flexible. For example, you can skip tabs, leaving them loaded, and come back to them.

You can specify the location of the TOC using "__TOC__" ("TOC" preceded and followed by two underscores) on a line by itelf. Sometimes it is used to allow an unheaded paragraph to follow it, but it also allows templates and images to flow past it.

Since the basic topic lists are meant to present topics related to their topics, those topics generally do not go in the see also section, as they fit in one of the other sections and would be redundant in see also -- so on the basic topics list pages, we'll use that section for subjects that might be of interest to those studying the main subject, but which aren't part of the that subject. Astronomy is the counterpart to Geography, for instance. I should probably include an annotation on that entry, so that readers don't think it's part of geography.  :-) If nobody has placed any links in those sections by the time I cycle through them, I'll remove the sections I can't fill.

I put various headings on the basic topic list pages by substituting the template "BLT", even though the sections are blank, because the whole set is under construction, and having the headings already there saves time. (For instance, then one can load up all the basic topic list pages in tabs using Linky, or run through them with AWB, to fill in one type of section). If we were to leave blank sections in regular articles, someone would remove them and complain for sure. :-) I figured if the sections were there that people visiting the pages may be inclined to add items to them, but if the sections weren't there they might not think of adding the sections that are standard for this set of lists. The Transhumanist    19:29, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

If there is no assignment (yet - I would still like to receive them), I will help with WP:EiA and its associated AfDs, etc. I hope that's OK. Auroranorth 11:21, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

As explained above, outside of coaching, I'd like you to avoid discussion forums, and focus on writing articles in the main namespace. Writing material for EiA articles, or for the articles of any subject you are interested in, is fine, but please focus on contributing text and citations. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources. We shall build your experience as an editor, and then everything else will likely fall naturally into place.

Based on your performance on the external links assignment, I can see you can handle almost anything. I think you are ready for something big...

Your new assignment is to build a list of topics (of at least 10,000 links) for a major subject, in subject index format. See List of mathematics articles for the format a subject index should grow into when it starts to become large (note that it focuses on articles rather than on topics -- we will be focusing on topics because we can include redlinks for tracking purposes). See List of psychology topics for an example of the single page format of a subject index. Note that the psychology list was mostly redlinks after I expanded it (as User:Pythagorus One), though I was still amazed at how many links were blue. As time goes on, more and more of them turn blue as new articles are created and as links get corrected (sometimes articles on the right topics are created that don't quite match up with the names for them in the index). Once you create or expand a subject index, Wikignome|s will start working on it.

Collect terms from many sources on the Web (not just one) -- the list must be a compilation, and it's best to compile it as a text file on your hard disk (so you can use many tools on it). Leave out person names (those almost always have their own list -- they are redundant if included on the main subject index). Don't worry about duplicates in your list yet, and don't worry about the order yet. Each term should be on its own line (for sortability). Don't add link brackets yet. You should be able to gather and build a list of over ten thousand terms in a relatively short period of time. The psychology list has over 6,000 entries, and the math list has over 20,000 (and all of its links are articles!) Macros help speed the task (for stripping extraneous text from cut and pasted blocks, adding carriage returns, etc.). For a free macro program, see my tools page.

Once the list is huge, linkify it (add link brackets to each term). Then collect all the links you can find on the subject on Wikipedia (other than people), and add them to the list. Find a sort program you like (there's a rudimentary one in Window's command shell, but it has quirks, and there are better ones available on the Internet), and sort the list. Then find and run it through a dedupe program to remove identical entries. Let me know when you find a good one -- the one I have been using is crap. If you have trouble finding one, be sure to ask at WP:VPT and at WP:RD/C.

Before you start, please discuss your choice of subject with me. It should be something major. Please stick to an academic subject (architecture, sociology, chemistry, economics, astronomy, or archaeology, etc.). It may already have a list (most of them aren't developed very far yet), but choose one that doesn't have more than around 2,000 items already on it. The existing list may or may not be part of the links you collect from Wikipedia (that depends on the quality of the list -- you may decide not to use it, if it has too many unrelated topics, has people in it, etc.) The Transhumanist    22:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

There's a list of links to major topic lists, corresponding to the coverage of basic topic lists, with redlinks showing missing subject indices at Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists of topics. The Transhumanist 06:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

This assignment's really big - are you entirely sure? Auroranorth (!) 06:23, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm already working on List of history topics with members of my prestigous project (#1 Wikiproject in terms of scope), WikiPrtoject History, which I revived from scratch. I'm now working on WP:TECHNOLOGY. Don't tell me it's too big a challenge! Your classmate, Phoenix-wiki ^{(talk · contribs)} 21:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Auroranorth, you can handle it. I took the List of psychology topics from this [1] to this [2] in about 12 hours. But I didn't have a set of instructions to follow. Nowadays, I could do it in about 1/3rd that time. Have fun.  :-) The Transhumanist    P.S.: don't do repetitive edits/tasks by hand: use macros! Whatever you do, don't try to sort the list by hand. Also, I think AWB has some functionality for users who are not registered, though I can't remember what features still work - it might be able to create link lists (when you find out, let me know). And you don't have to do this whole assignment in a single sitting.  :) -TT

AWB can make a list of links without the user being logged on (I just checked). That makes it a pretty useful link-gathering tool. The Transhumanist    10:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Here's a quicky index I made last night from links gathered from Wikipedia: List of geography topics. I used AWB (without logging on), Wordpad, and a sandbox. Each time it pulls links from a page, AWB automatically alphabetizes them and strips out duplicates, then adds them to the end of the list (so only parts of the whole list are alphabetized). But you can save the link list to a file, and then cut and paste the file into a sandbox, and then run AWB on the sandbox. Unfortunately, AWB only handles up to 10,000 links (I think). The Transhumanist   

Ah, OK. Can you suggest some topics I could consider? Auroranorth (!) 08:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Look over the page Lists of basic topics and List of academic disciplines. Whatever subjects grab you, there you go. Build or expand the corresponding "List of ____ topics" for each. The Transhumanist    17:10, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

OK... I will sort things out. I need some time (as I cannot be on the wiki next weekend - helping with the Australian election on Saturday and other commitments on Sunday) as I cannot be on that often! Auroranorth (!) 08:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Let's go back to using our talk pages for communications. We'll use this page for archiving your coaching discussions. The Transhumanist    18:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC)