User talk:Gug01/Archive 4

DYK for Ion Agârbiceanu

On 9 February 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ion Agârbiceanu, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Romanian writer Ion Agârbiceanu was influenced in his work by the four years he spent as a parish priest in the Apuseni Mountains? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ion Agârbiceanu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:00, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's probably more or less ready at this point. Instructions for nominating are at WP:GAI. I'd put him under "Language and literature". - Biruitorul ^Talk 21:03, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your opinion. I'll nominate it if Dahn agrees. If not, we'll have a debate. Gug01 (talk) 21:05, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No objections. Dahn (talk) 10:28, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 1

Hi! Thank you for subscribing to the WikiProject X Newsletter. For our first issue...

Has WikiProject X changed the world yet? No.

We opened up shop last month and announced our existence to the world. Our first phase is the "research" phase, consisting mostly of reading and listening. We set up our landing page and started collecting stories. So far, 28 stories have been shared about WikiProjects, describing a variety of experiences across numerous WikiProjects. A recurring story involves a WikiProject that starts off strong but has trouble continuing to stay active. Most people describe using WikiProjects as a way to get feedback from other editors. Some quotes:

"Working on requested articles, utilising the reliable sources section, and having an active WikiProject to ask questions in really helped me learn how to edit Wikipedia and looking back I don't know how long I would have stayed editing without that project." – Sam Walton on WikiProject Video Games
"I believe that the main problem of the Wikiprojects is that they are complicated to use. There should be a a much simpler way to check what do do, what needs to be improved etc." – Tetra quark
"In the late 2000s, WikiProject Film tried to emulate WP:MILHIST in having coordinators and elections. Unfortunately, this was not sustainable and ultimately fell apart." – Erik

Of course, these are just anecdotes. While they demonstrate what is possible, they do not necessarily explain what is typical. We will be using this information in conjunction with a quantitative analysis of WikiProjects, as documented on Meta. Particularly, we are interested in the measurement of WikiProject activity as it relates to overall editing in that WikiProject's subject area.

We also have 50 people and projects signed up for pilot testing, which is an excellent start! (An important caveat: one person volunteering a WikiProject does not mean the WikiProject as a whole is interested; just that there is at least one person, which is a start.)

While carrying out our research, we are documenting the problems with WikiProjects and our ideas for making WikiProjects better. Some ideas include better integration of existing tools into WikiProjects, recommendations of WikiProjects for people to join, and improved coordination with Articles for Creation. These are just ideas that may or may not make it to the design phase; we will see. We are also working with WikiProject Council to improve the directory of WikiProjects, with the goal of a reliable, self-updating WikiProject directory. Stay tuned! If you have any ideas, you are welcome to leave a note on our talk page.

That's all for now. Thank you for subscribing!

– Harej 17:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Russulaceae

Thanks for reviewing! Tylototriton (talk) 15:44, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tylototriton: You welcome! I really loved reviewing the article. Gug01 (talk) 21:09, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Termitolinus) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Termitolinus, Gug01!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please define your taxon articles in clear language (do not assume the reader knows what Aleocharinae is), and always include a taxobox. Also, relying on primary literature like papers from the '70s raises the possibility of outdated taxonomy.

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tachyporus has been accepted

Tachyporus, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 02:22, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anachalcos convexus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scarab beetle. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Stenus zunicus) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Stenus zunicus, Gug01!

Wikipedia editor Fisheriesmgmt just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Great start! I look forward to seeing this article expanded as much as possible. Please let me know if there's anything I can do to help!

To reply, leave a comment on Fisheriesmgmt's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Drypta iris, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Iris. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Haliplidae reference

Template:Haliplidae reference has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 17:30, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Gymnusini) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Gymnusini, Gug01!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please note that basal (phylogenetics) is not a synonym for "basic".

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Re: Category:Hesperinae stubs and Category:Tachinidae stubs split

Hello, Gug01. You have new messages at Dawynn's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Review Request

Hi, I saw you requesting a review for your article Ion Agârbiceanu. I am interested in doing so, provided you also please review my article Ali. Thanks. RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 16:10, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 2

For this month's issue...

Making sense of a lot of data.

Work on our prototype will begin imminently. In the meantime, we have to understand what exactly we're working with. To this end, we generated a list of 71 WikiProjects, based on those brought up on our Stories page and those who had signed up for pilot testing. For those projects where people told stories, we coded statements within those stories to figure out what trends there were in these stories. This approach allowed us to figure out what Wikipedians thought of WikiProjects in a very organic way, with very little by way of a structure. (Compare this to a structured interview, where specific questions are asked and answered.) This analysis was done on 29 stories. Codes were generally classified as "benefits" (positive contributions made by a WikiProject to the editing experience) and "obstacles" (issues posed by WikiProjects, broadly speaking). Codes were generated as I went along, ensuring that codes were as close to the original data as possible. Duplicate appearances of a code for a given WikiProject were removed.

We found 52 "benefit" statements encoded and 34 "obstacle" statements. The most common benefit statement referring to the project's active discussion and participation, followed by statements referring to a project's capacity to guide editor activity, while the most common obstacles made reference to low participation and significant burdens on the part of the project maintainers and leaders. This gives us a sense of WikiProjects' big strength: they bring people together, and can be frustrating to editors when they fail to do so. Meanwhile, it is indeed very difficult to bring editors together on a common interest; in the absence of a highly motivated core of organizers, the technical infrastructure simply isn't there.

We wanted to pair this qualitative study with quantitative analysis of a WikiProject and its "universe" of pages, discussions, templates, and categories. To this end I wrote a script called ProjAnalysis which will, for a given WikiProject page (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Trek) and WikiProject talk-page tag (e.g. Template:WikiProject Star Trek), will give you a list of usernames of people who edited within the WikiProject's space (the project page itself, its talk page, and subpages), and within the WikiProject's scope (the pages tagged by that WikiProject, excluding the WikiProject space pages). The output is an exhaustive list of usernames. We ran the script to analyze our test batch of WikiProjects for edits between March 1, 2014 and February 28, 2015, and we subjected them to further analysis to only include those who made 10+ edits to pages in the projects' scope, those who made 4+ edits to the projects' space, and those who made 10+ edits to pages in scope but not 4+ edits to pages in the projects' space. This latter metric gives us an idea of who is active in a certain subject area of Wikipedia, yet who isn't actively engaging on the WikiProject's pages. This information will help us prioritize WikiProjects for pilot testing, and the ProjAnalysis script in general may have future life as an application that can be used by Wikipedians to learn about who is in their community.

Complementing the above two studies are a design analysis, which summarizes the structure of the different WikiProject spaces in our test batch, and the comprehensive census of bots and tools used to maintain WikiProjects, which will be finished soon. With all of this information, we will have a game plan in place! We hope to begin working with specific WikiProjects soon.

As a couple of asides...

Database Reports has existed for several years on Wikipedia to the satisfaction of many, but many of the reports stopped running when the Toolserver was shut off in 2014. However, there is good news: the weekly New WikiProjects and WikiProjects by Changes reports are back, with potential future reports in the future.
WikiProject X has an outpost on Wikidata! Check it out. It's not widely publicized, but we are interested in using Wikidata as a potential repository for metadata about WikiProjects, especially for WikiProjects that exist on multiple Wikimedia projects and language editions.

That's all for now. Thank you for subscribing! If you have any questions or comments, please share them with us.

Harej (talk) 01:44, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re Tagging

Done It took me an hour to do it. I will now get busy with tagging various Acanthocinini species and by next week there will be none left (since I already done A-E of that list). Have a good day and happy editing!--Mishae (talk) 22:03, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mishae Thanks a lot! I really appreciate the help. Gug01 (talk) 23:51, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Let me know if you want anything else to be tagged. P.S. As of now I completed through the H's and did some S-V's as well. :)--Mishae (talk) 23:54, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Gug01 (talk) 23:54, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Celebrate

	Yoor Know Phool
	Have a humorous day filled with lots of PHUN on this April Fools Day 2015. Any annoyance is purely coincidental. Bfpage \|leave a message 10:12, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Oberea auriventris) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Oberea auriventris, Gug01!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Remember to italicize genus names.

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Myrmedoniina

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Myrmedoniina, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://webserviceskey.tolweb.org/Myrmedoniina.

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. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 23:05, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]