User talk:Willscrlt/Archives/2006-2007

This page is an archive of past discussions involving Willscrlt (→“¡¿Talk?!”). Please 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 Will's current talk page.

2006 and 2007

This is an archive of messages from 2006 and 2007. Please do not edit these entries, except if you need to fix a link, image, etc. Thanks!

Sorry that the layout is such a mess. I originally manually split the content out to several subpages, but have decided to merge everything back into a single, very large subpage. --Willscrlt (→“¡¿Talk?!”) 15:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uncategorized discussions

Thanks to helpful people!

I just want to thank the helpful people who have given me such great feedback. I really appreciate it. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk) 09:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Userboxes/Health

Could someone help me do this parser function thing here to take this page out of Wikipedian space? I can't figure it out. Do you have to signify that you want no userboxes like {{Userbox|categories=no}}? -PatPeter 04:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

__

Hi PatPeter

What the category suppression "parser function thing" does is shut off the list of categories that appear at the bottom of that page:

Categories: Wikipedians with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder | Aspergian Wikipedians | Wikipedians with bipolar disorder | Wikipedians with borderline personality disorder | Wikipedians with Cataplexy | Depressive Wikipedians | Dysthymic Wikipedians | Dyslexic Wikipedians | Wikipedians with general anxiety disorder | Wikipedians with multiple personality disorder | Wikipedians with Narcolepsy | Wikipedians with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder | Wikipedians with social anxiety | Wikipedians with PDD-NOS | Wikipedians with post-traumatic stress disorder | Synaesthetic Wikipedians | Wikipedians with Tourette syndrome | Wikipedians with carpal tunnel syndrome | Wikipedians with pectus excavatum | Wikipedians in wheelchairs | Deaf Wikipedians | Deaf Culture Wikipedians | Hyperopic Wikipedians | Wikipedians with Astigmatism | Color blind Wikipedians | Wikipedians interested in drugs | Left-handed Wikipedians | Mixed-handed Wikipedians | Wikipedians with IBS | Wikipedians with breast cancer | Wikipedians who survived cancer | Wikipedians interested in herbalism | Wikipedians who support the Jade Ribbon Campaign | Wikipedia userboxes

The only category that makes sense for that particular page is the Wikipedia userboxes category. The page is a list of userboxes. The page itself is not a Wikipedian; therefore, it doesn't really make sense being in the Aspergian Wikipedians category. Right?

The first thing I would suggest doing is editing the page and adding |categories=no as the last attribute in each userbox template:

{{User:Example/Ubx/SampleBox|categories=no}}

Next, check the list of categories at the bottom of the page to see which userboxes generate a category automatically. Edit each box, one-by-one, inserting the category suppression parser function as shown in the example. It's pretty much just a copy and paste process.

After saving the updated userbox, when you return to the Wikipedia:Userboxes/Health page, the category that userbox used to add should no longer appear. If it is still there, refresh your browser cache and reload the page. If it's still there, either the |categories=no is wrong (wrong place, typo, etc.) on the Health page, or the parser function isn't set up correctly in the userbox.

That's the "purpose of" and "how-to-use" this feature.

You asked how to take a "page out of Wikipedia space". If your intention is to actually have the page appear in some other namespace, then you would just move the page using the link at the top of the page. When it asks you where you want to move the page, just put in the new namespace, a colon, and then the page name (which can be the same or different). I suppose that "taking a page out of Wikipedia space" could also include the task of exporting a page from Wikipedia and importing it into a different Wiki. That can be done using the Special:Export pages page, and then, if you have administrative rights on the other wiki, the Special:Import pages page there. I doubt that's what you meant, though.

If you have any other questions about how to use the parser functions, please let me know. :-)

--Willscrlt (Talk) 05:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OOPS I meant WikipediaN space, my bad, I'll message back to confirm if I get it done. -PatPeter 23:30, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Category suppression supporting templates

Hi Willscrlt,
Would you have any objection to the above being renamed Category:Templates suppressing categorization...? Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 09:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...I have no problem with the category being renamed. ... Your specific suggestion of "Category:Templates suppressing categorization", however, is a misnomer for the templates...

Thanks for spotting this oversight. Would "Templates able to suppress categorization" fit the bill...?

I agree that some kind of standardization would be useful; meanwhile, I've left a thought re routes through catgories to templates here, the place where I've transferred the discussion that began on my talkpage. Regards, David (talk) 18:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Category:Infobox templates, Category:Navigational templates

You said: Hi. I will give you a first-hand reason as to why those categories are very useful (and I know, because one month ago, I used them!). When I was setting out to create an infobox for the Mixed Drinks WikiProject, I needed to look at a lot of examples to find ones that did what I needed (see {{WPMIXInfobox}} for the results). The same thing was true when a couple of weeks ago I started working on the {{Alcoholic beverages}} navigation box. These categories actually, for me at least, are more useful than the documentation. Seeing similar templates grouped together like that is very, very helpful from a developer's standpoint. Sure, the likelihood of any non-developer getting much use out of the categories is low, but when you need to find examples to steal from, it's a great resource. A name change would be fine (though I'm not sure how that would help), but don't merge the templates into some other broader category. That would be a major step backwards in helpfulness for template designers, and that's already a steep enough learning curve to work through. --Willscrlt (Talk) 06:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been thinking this through further, and I'm still leaning towards trying to get the categories deleted. I understand where you're coming from here - I've been in the same position several times in the past - but I think having categories with the aim of them holding every single template of that type is OTT. How would you feel about an "Introduction to creating navigation boxes" page (and the same for infoboxes)? These would describe the various features that the type of template could have, along with many links to existing templates that use these features. Hopefully, this would accomplish two goals - making the templates easier to understand and develop by those that aren't doing so already, and providing targeted links to templates that do specific functions, so that you don't have to visit lots of templates looking for a specific feature / idea. 23:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Thanks, willscrlt - I will help when possible as you suggest. Alot of the edits is do are surrounding school - it is my way of studying with a utilitarianistic spin off. If you ever need opinions/support on a subject message me. thuglas^talk|edits 17:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC) Actually, i had only posted around 5 minutes before your reply! very quick :)[reply]

Problem

The article on 'Canadian Whisky' has to be changed - Its spelled whiskey if its produced in Canada. I don't know how to change this.thuglas^talk|edits 19:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its weird because my bottles conflict. i have books that maintain it is whiskey, however. thuglas^talk|edits 19:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mulligan's Bar Guide

Thanks for referencing my book on your B52 shooter entry. shawnmulligan@hotmail.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.53.149.250 (talk) 19:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

PLz adopt me

i hope i am not going across the line but i am so confused and it has taken me 3 days just to figure out how to post like this, and people keep harpen on me to sign my post!

--Sebastian10 22:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)Sebastian10[reply]

Neuro Barnstar

If you could vote on my barnstar it would be great. I dont care whether you vote for or against, i just dont want it to be dismissed because noone voted.thuglas^talk|edits 22:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it got support before your wikibreak was over! thuglas^T|C 02:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism?

Someone posted this on your userpage - im assuming its vandalism because it isnt really an award. Im just letting you know incase you like it and wanted to keep it :) thuglas^T|C 02:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Had to look at the logs to see what that comment was all about. I appreciate you keeping an eye on things for me. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk) 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

Hello! I'm rather new at this and was wondering if you would adopt me. I've slowly figured out how to edit things (i.e. post the comment). Oh, and I apologize if this doesn't appear at the bottom.

I'm on a much longer than anticipated wikibreak with no clear return time. I think you would be better served to find someone else to help you. Sorry. :-( --Willscrlt (Talk) 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WPMIXInfobox

Hi, I looked at this template, and how it's being used in some of the cocktails articles, and I think there's a problem here. The template has the list of ingredients, including exact measurements of each, along with preparation instructions. In other words, the template includes a recipe, which violates WP:NOT. Given the ease of linking to outside recipes, and given that we already have a wikibooks bartending guide [1] where recipes can be uploaded, I really don't see the need to include recipes in wikipedia articles. While I understand that some of the official recipes, such as the IBA recipes, would certainly be useful information to many wikipedia readers, the same can be said for videogame walkthroughs, oatmeal cookie recipes, and various other how-to guides which WP:NOT forbids. I'm not going to push to remove this content myself, but eventually someone's going to come along and remove all the recipe content, so I think you'd be better off just not including it from the beginning to save the trouble of people entering in hundreds of cocktail recipes and then having them all removed later on. --Xyzzyplugh 15:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this is/was addressed at the Mixed Drinks WikiProject. --Willscrlt (Talk) 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ADoption

HI: I am new to Wikipedia and am looking to get involved. I work in higher education and have been viewing information in here for some time. I am looking to post, edit and explore. I am not sure if this is the right way to get adopted, so please forgive an violations of protocol. I am so new that I don't know how to tell you get in touch with me. My username is rmanuel23 -- I hope that helps.

Thanks in advance for your help, and I look forward to hearing from you.

Rob (Rmanuel23 02:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)) March 1 2007[reply]

I'm on a much longer than anticipated wikibreak with no clear return time. I think you would be better served to find someone else to help you. Sorry. :-( --Willscrlt (Talk) 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anybody there said the Traveller

Knocking on the moonlit door... I hope that your prolongued absence isn't permanent, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't want to lose our chief cocktail editor!! Hope you enjoy the rest of your extended wikibreak... We'll all be eagerly awaiting your return! Happy-melon 11:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

I hope your okay! thuglas^T|C 14:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So do I!! Give us a wave Willscrlt!! Happy-melon 19:23, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you come back soon! ^C ₃₃ ²² 03:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi folks! Yes, I am alive and well. It is very depressing to look at my edit history and see that for the month of March I made only 2 edits, and I think they were just updating my away status. *sigh*

A lot of things happened in that other place known as the "real world" that took up a lot of my time. It's still pretty hectic, but hopefully I will be able to get back to some editing here before the end of the month. I doubt I will be able to commit even half of the time I did before, but anything is better than nothing, right?

Anyway, it means a lot to me knowing that there are people who care about me and appreciate my earlier efforts. I hope I can return to being a productive Wikipedian again, soon. It was so much fun! --Willscrlt (Talk) 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal

Hello. I saw that you are a member of the Templates project, and thought it would be good to bring this to your attention. I have made a proposal that would take care of the userbos issues and the general clutter of the Template namespace. Please see it here and make comments conserning it. Thank you for your time. SadanYagci 14:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As long as userboxes remain available, I don't care where they are stored. With WikiMedia software, it's pretty easy to link to them anywhere. --Willscrlt (Talk) 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where would I go to make a template for my Wikiproject.

I want to have made a template for my Wikiproject: Kabbalah. I want it so I can put it on various Kabbalah related pages. How would I go about having someone make it for me? Lighthead 02:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saved a picture from Wikimedia Commons that I want to use, tell me if you are interested in doing it for me; or if you know anyone in general or particular who can do it for me. Lighthead 03:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it took so long to respond. Honestly, the best way to go about getting a new template is to find a similar one you like, copy it to your sandbox or WikiProject area, and then tweak it until it works for you. That's how I got started anyway. If you are still in need of some template help whenever I eventually return from wikibreak, I will be happy to talk to you about this more.

I'm not sure what you meant about the picture. Do you mean that you want to use the picture from Wikimedia Commons here at Wikipedia? If so, just refer to it by name, like [[Image:Example Filename.jpg]], and Wikipedia will automatically fetch it for you from Wikimedia Commons if it finds a file with that name there. I hope that helps! --Willscrlt (Talk) 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your response of my response (whoo!)

I actually already made it. The only thing I might need help on is if the image is truly fair use. Check it out if you want. Wikipedia: WikiProject Kabbalah. Lighthead 02:12, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that helps, thanks. Lighthead 18:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Good to hear! I still will edit misc. small edits, (errors, spelling) but im avoiding the beurocracy of wikpedia - its too irritating. I also dont intend on writing any articles or spending a great deal of time doing it. I decided that writing articles doesnt help me study as much as i thought it did, and school is first for me. I still check messages here and there so if you want to keep in contact im here! thuglas^T|C 19:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amway/Quixtar

Just a note to apologize for my "disappearence". A crazy few months. Happy for the "case" to be closed, but still would like a careful eye on "balance" in these and related articles, especially from folk who are admins. --Insider201283 19:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ADOPT input

Hello, Willscrlt. The Adopt-a-User program is looking for new ideas and input on the program. If you are still interested please stop by the talk page and read some of the ideas being floated and give a comment. If you want to update or change your information on the adopter's list page, now would be a great time! Thanks! V60 ^{干什么？ · VDemolitions} 03:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WikiProject Mixed Drinks disambiguations

A tag has been placed on Category:WikiProject Mixed Drinks disambiguations, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a blank article providing no content to the in the current revision and past revisions would have been candidates for speedy deletion. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --Android Mouse Bot 2 16:09, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

June 2007 Wikiproject Food and Drink Newsletter

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter June 2007

Wikipedia:Userboxes/Health

Could you help me add parser functions to the userboxes on this page? I can't figure it out but it would be helpful to know because Userspace is my area of expertise. -PatPeter 04:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops I forgot to link it, but this is the page /\ and you can see how this Wikipedia Page is in Wikipedian Category Space. Yeah I don't need you to do every one with time permitting just message me instructions (I read most of your subpage and was still confused from Category:Category suppression supporting templates link). -PatPeter 04:54, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is Template:usbk, I keep putting the |categories=no command in the link to the userbox. I would edit the template, putting |categories=no in {{{1}}} but it confuses the hell out of me. If you think we should could you put that command in the right spot for me? I'm really sorry if I am taking up your time with this. -PatPeter 23:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Omgosh I was thinking the exact same thing, that is why I did not dare edit it. Message me if you can once we are live because I can't wait to see one and only one category on this page. Talk to you tomorrow or so on, -PatPeter 00:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can do all the parser functions for the individual userboxes but look at the categories on this page: Wikipedia:Userboxes/WikiProjects. LOL. -PatPeter 06:36, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah no problem, so what is your new Wiki? And I try to avoid lines as much as I can and stay with HTML, like in userboxes as an example ("{|" and other such things are completely pointless to use in Userboxes, they only take off "<table" and the like). But for more complicated things like "<a href" they cut it out, so I don't know if they would allow pure HTML parser functions. -PatPeter 17:16, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working on the archives of this page and this page itself for a while look at this Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/New Userboxes. Friggin insane, we need to get a squad together, just us two cant tackle all these pages. -PatPeter 19:27, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

July 2007 Wikiproject Food and Drink Newsletter

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter July 2007--Christopher Tanner, CCC 19:18, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

August 2007 Wikiproject Food and Drink Newsletter

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter August 2007

--Christopher Tanner, CCC 16:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi?

Hey! Sorry I've been gone for so long I was on a "wikibreak" whilst studying for exams. I decided to completely cut myself off from the Internet, except for BBC Bitesize, SamLearning.com and the likes. I see you're on a Wikibreak too... I hope things are all okay and you're enjoying your summer. I don't think I'll be back properly until September, maybe Christmas depending on the workload at college... but then I'll be back and willing to learn. :) O2mcgovem 02:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just read your comments to thuglas and happy melon. You take as long as you like on your Wikibreak... real world issues are more important. Sorry to be so annoying when things are so hectic. :) O2mcgovem 02:50, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

September 2007 WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter September 2007
--Christopher Tanner, CCC 15:24, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IBA and WikiProject Standardized

Hi there. I feel I must question the decision to have IBA has the standard for cocktail recipes. While a standard would be nice, looking at IBAs website I have to sort of question why it, of all web sites, was chosen as the official list. Besides the cocktails that people have invented themselves for the purpse of competition, I only count 64 cocktails in the official list, or any list for that matter. That means that in the 56 years that the IBA has been running for, they have only added on average one single drink per year to their official list. There are many cocktails in this world and if the IBA can only offer recipes for a very very small number of the then I don't see how IBA could even be considered as an official recipe list for cocktails. Unless I misread the IBAs webpage, I will be making moves in the next few weeks to be removing all IBA influence over every wikipedia page (besides its own page) and the wikipedia drinks project. Thank you anyway for trying to help. JayKeaton 19:15, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter November 2007

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter November 2007
--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 04:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter December 2007

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter Decemberr 2007
--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 22:31, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actions

November 2006

Your AIAV report

You reported the following IP to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism 20 minutes ago:

204.111.40.10 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) - Talk shows repeated nonsense such as on Podcast at 05:15. I'm new to reporting. Should I just revert and post to talk (yet again), or is there a threshhold for reporting here? Sorry if I jumped the gun. :-) Willscrlt 13:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I did not block him because he/she has not been vandalising for at least 30 minute before you reported him; also, they were not warned properly with the {{test1}} to {{test4}} series of warning templates, which are described in Wikipedia:Vandalism. For future reports, please ensure the user/IP has recently vandalised and are properly warned. Thanks! Kimchi.sg 14:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I get the 30 minute part now. The first time I read it, I totally misunderstood what it was saying. Sorry about that. I noticed that the test1-test4 process had not been followed. It just looked to me like several warnings for exactly the same thing had been given, but it was starting to look like empty threats instead of any liklihood of real action. I also realize that it was an anon IP, so it also gave me pause. I appreciate your patience as I get my feet wet here. I love Wikipedia, and I want to help out--but do so without causing any new problems. And believe me, I always read whatever policies I can find before taking any actions until I'm really familiar with it. :-)

December 2006

Your AfD nom

Hi, I noticed you had nom'd Kill Reality 2, and it needed a bit of tweaking for formatting and listing issues. It looks good now, and I hope I wasn't stepping on your toes. It just needed the proper "Subst" tag at the top of the discussion page, and a listing on the AfD page. I hope that helps. FYI - I saw this article yesterday, and was considering the AfD myself, so I'm glad you took care of it : ) Doc Tropics 16:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Doc. I appreciate the help. I'm still getting the hang of how stuff works in a Wikipedia way. I've moderated BBSes, Yahoo Groups, and other similar things. It's both fun and work. It does take a little time to get used to the "proper" ways of doing things in each new system. Plus, you can never forget that there are living, breathing, feeling people on the other side of the screen. Even people who vandalize and spam are people (though sometimes it might feel more like they are bottom feeders). ;-) I've seen your name around. I read your posts about that first flame war you experienced. Those are always fun things to experience (being sarcastic here). I like the way that Wikipedia is very democratic and yet very deliberate in the way it generally handles things. I don't always agree with certain decisions, but I believe in the process. I am glad there are people like you to help out with things like this around here. :-) --Willscrlt 00:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the page, and I could not tell what the correct subst tag is. Without deleting my own page, could you let me know what you did that I didn't do, so that I can do it right in the future? Thanks! --Willscrlt 01:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh gosh, if you checked my Contrib History you've probably got a terrible opinion of me! But I'm happy to assist with what I can; more experienced editors have helped me with the tricky bits of WP, and the right way to repay it is by helping others who could use a hand.

I think that what happened is that after you put the AfD tag on the article, you clicked on "This arrticle's entry" and entered your text. without adding the template to the top of the page. I'm having trouble writing it down here so that it all remains visible but read step #2 here and look for "{{Subst:afd2...". Instead of entering your "reason" text onto the page seperately, it should be entered as a replacement within the template for "Reasons this article should be deleted".

I'm not 100% positive that was the problem, but it's the likeliest explanation. Just place that "Subst:afd2..." at the top of the AfD's discussion page and it should be fine. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask : ) Doc Tropics 02:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. I added the tag and then clicked the link in the tag. Thanks for guessing and explaining what I did wrong and how I fix it in the future. It really helps! :-) BTW, I looked at your contributions, and I don't see anything there that would give me a negative opinion of you. Keep up the great anti-vandalism work! --Willscrlt 02:45, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Will, everyone appreciates a bit of recognition, especially in a volunteer effort like this : )

I noticed your comment at the Pump just now, and I posted below it. It seems that we have similar, but not identical, opinions. Debates like that one are always a good way to let everyone express their views, but one of the weaknesses of an open platform like WP is that a small-but-vocal minority can sometimes appear to carry more weight than a strong-but-silent majority. One of the advantages of the WP system though, is that a combination of reason and common sense will usually emerge as "consensus". See you in the trenches : ) Doc Tropics 03:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_December_5#E-Sword

Because you participated in the AfD, I thought I should inform you of the deletion review. --Karnesky 17:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

January 2007

Making redirects

You don't need to request a redirect. You can just make one by typing #redirect [[new page title]] on a page. If you think redirecting a page might be controversial, you can discuss it on the article's talk page. See Wikipedia:Redirect for help. Anyone can revert a redirect back to the original content (see Help:revert), so don't worry about doing them since it can be undone if anyone feels there wasn't enough warning. Angela . 23:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your mediation with Insider and Will Beback

If you have concerns about the mediation case between Insider201283 and Will_Beback, please use the dedicated comment page rather than filling up my talk page with comments. All such comments have been moved to that page. Thanks! --Willscrlt (Talk|Cntrb) 10:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Will, could you possibly email me regarding some issues I'd like to discuss privately. They should be shared privately with Will_B as well, so if you can contact him that would be great. Thanks very much for your help here, I VERY much appreciate it. I was frankly quite astounded to have someone appear who actually understands the area without being to close to it. I was preparing for undertaking a large dose of exhausting mediator education :-) --Insider201283 14:43, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can certainly understand if there are some things you would prefer to keep out of public record, especially if it relates to finances, but also realize that any such private communication could lead people to think we are working out a "back room" deal. At the very least, Will_Beback should be included in any discussions related to the case, whether via e-mail or otherwise. But he might not want you to have his e-mail address. --Willscrlt (Talk|Cntrb) 23:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which is why I said he should be told too and asked you to do it :-) --Insider201283 23:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Willscrit, Feel free to contact me through my email account. [2]. -Will Beback · † · 00:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stub coding

The best place would be WT:STUB. I can't say I care for it: it seems like an undue amount of "esoterica creep" to solve what seems like a non-problem. The more complex these templates get, the less accessible they are for the average editor, and the more liable people are to screw up when copying or further varying them (already a semi-regular occurrence, in my experience). Alai 23:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposals procedures

Please innaugerate the talk section and make sure both tags link to said talk for common discussion when proposing such. See {{Merge/doc}}, {{Mergeto/doc}}, {{Mergefrom/doc}} instructions, but basically, open the talk. Post your reasons, close that. Grab the section name. Put that in the templates. Oh, it's the new fashion to add date= lines, so the BOT doesn't have to. Best regards // FrankB 21:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it. Thanks. That was my first time merge tagging. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 07:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

February 2007

MedCab case

Hi, can this case be closed? --Ideogram 20:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Sorry. It slipped my mind yesterday. I have closed it now at the MEDCAB. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 22:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

February 2007

References?

I was looking at some articles, and wondered if there was a particular way of citing sources? A website for example, do I just put the URL? Or do I put it like a bibliography (Author of Website, Title etc.)? Chameleon3322 22:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are two ways you can do it. The easiest (and probably best) way is to use the appropriate template found at WP:CITET (or Wikipedia:Citation templates, whichever is easier to remember). The other way is using the <ref> tag, but it's actually more difficult to use and results in less standardized output. I tend to use <ref>, but that's only because that's the way I started out editing, and it's been a pain to train myself to switch. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 22:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

How do redirects work?--33 22

For in-depth information, see WP:REDIRECT (or just plain WP:R works, too).

Wikipedia is pretty smart about pointing you to the correct article when you type a topic into the search engine. A lot of that is automatic, but a lot is also semi-manual.

The WikiMedia software which powers Wikipedia will take input like "Upper and lowercase", "upper and lowercase" and even "Upper And Lowercase" will all be matched automatically with an article titled "Upper and lowercase". (I bolded the uppercase ones for easier visibility for you.) However, the software cannot automatically figure out how to match "Upper and Lowercase" or "UpPeR aNd LoWeRcAsE" to the same article. Usually it's not necessary to create redirects for those types of articles, but sometimes it is.

One situation where I created one was for the List of cocktails. Since many people visiting Wikipedia do not know the convention of only the first letter and any proper nouns being capitalized, they might search for List of Cocktails. Before creating a redirect from the "funky" capitalization to the standard one, that would have appeared as a red link (i.e., the article would not be found).

Other uses for redirects include creating shortcuts (WP:MIXA which is much shorter to type than Wikipedia:WikiProject Mixed Drinks/Assessment), pointing one term to a related article (Virgin pina colada redirects to Piña Colada), pointing to a particular section within an article (Simple syrup redirects to a specific portion of the Syrup article), correcting common misspellings (Condoleeza Rice redirects to Condoleezza Rice), pointing alternate spellings to a single article (colour redirects to color), and many more reasons (which are discussed in WP:R, which is a redirect itself to the main article).

So, how do you create your first redirect? It's pretty easy. First, go to the page where you wish to create the redirect (except in certain situations, this should be a new page). If you are using the default monobook skin and have Javascript enabled, above the edit window you should have a toolbar that includes a button that looks like this: #R

Clicking that buttons gives you a basic redirect, and all you have to do is fill in the location where you want that reader to ultimately end up.

#REDIRECT [[Insert text]]

So, to redirect from "List OF CockTails" (a frivolous redirect to say the least, because it's rather unlikely anyone would ever type that outside of this example), you would go to: List OF CockTails (which should be a red link), and enter the following on the first and only line of the new article:

#REDIRECT [[List of cocktails]]

After you save the new article (don't forget to add an edit summary), you will see the article's title (with the funky capitalization) and a bent arrow pointing to the proper article title (which certainly should not be a red link).

Always avoid "double redirects", which are where one redirect points to another redirect (which theoretically could point to another and so on). For example, WP:R should point directly to Wikipedia:Redirect, not to WP:REDIRECT which then redirects on to Wikipedia:Redirect.

If you do all that, then congratulations! You have created a redirect.

There is, however, one more thing that you should do (but aren't required to do), and that is identify the reason you created the redirect in the first place. You do so by adding one of the "R" templates after the redirect. Using the previous example again:

#REDIRECT [[List of cocktails]] {{R from other capitalisation}}

For a complete list of "R" templates, see Category:Redirect templates.

That covers the majority of what you need to know to become a redirecting expert. There are also soft redirects to other WikiProjects, how redirects work when moving pages, redirects with possibilities, and a few more topics listed you might need to know to become a true "expert" in redirecting, but the points I mentioned above will take you farther than most people ever care to learn. If you really enjoy this whole redirecting thing, there's even a WikiProject for Redirects you could join. It all depends on how in-depth you want to get. Have fun! --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 01:19, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Talk Page...Dang Vandalism

My talk page had recently been vandilised, and I don't know how to revert. So how do you revert? 33 22 00:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Fortunately it looks like the "vandalism" was very minimal [to your user page as you reported earlier], thankfully. It's rather odd, too, because the two suspicious edits that I saw were from two different anon accounts, and the only edits they made were ones to your user page. That would tend to indicate these edits were done by someone you know, likely a friend (or enemy) in the real world who knows your Wikipedia account.

Before I delve into reverting vandalism edits, allow me to describe the proper steps (at least as I have come to understand them, and since I have rarely have to use them much, I might miss something) to deal with vandalism. This holds true on your own page, articles, or anywhere.

Dealing with vandalism

Go to the talk page of the user and see if there are already complaints on the talk page.
1. If there are, try to determine at which level the user is currently (1=first offense, 2=second, etc.). Warnings (and actions) escalate in priority and intensity. That is, they start out assuming good faith and that the edit was a goof or a test. IF they have already been warned once, they are reminded more firmly. If they continue to ignore the warnings, it becomes more difficult to assume that same level of good faith, and the warnings become more stern. By the fourth warning (and there does have to either be some reasonable time between the warnings, or other clear evidence that the user has likely read the warnings, such as referring to them in subsequent attacks), generally they are told to knock it off or they will be blocked. You should be aware that banishment will not happen if the user was not given adequate warning, in proper sequence, and in fairly recent terms (i.e., actions up to level 3 several months ago should start back at level 1 again, not jump ahead to level 4, because anon users are almost certainly different people now).
2. Start a new section on the talk page. A lot of people use "Your recent edit to Example" for the heading.
3. Add {{test}}, or possibly a more specific user message warning to the talk page, at the appropriate warning level. Whichever warning template you use, include a pipe "|" character and then the article name to help document where the vandalism occured (level 2 example: {{test2|Example}} --~~~~.
4. Enter an edit summary (something like "Your recent edit to Example - test2 warning" works well) and save the message.
Revert the edit the user made (assuming someone else hasn't already done so, which is common in cases of blatant vandalism and on very busy pages). Make sure the "Watch this page" box is checked if you would like to keep an eye on the page for repeat attacks.
If the same user strikes again, repeat the earlier steps until warning level 4 is reached.
Do be mindful of the three-revert rule! If you revert an article more than three times in the same 24-hour period, then you might very well be banned, even you were dealing with vandalism. And the 3RR is not permission to make 3 reverts every 24 hours, but rather a maximum that should be made. Essentially, if you are having to revert something that many times, it's time to visit the Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents and get some admins involved to help. Don't fight vandalism battles alone. You'll likely lose, too, if you do. (The 3RR is why I suggest starting by giving notice and then reverting, because you can then get four warnings out while only having made three edits.)
After the user has received his/her four warnings (maybe even at three), report the vandalism to the admins.
1. WP:AIAV (Administrator intervention against vandalism) is the place to go if the user is currently engaging in vandalism (and I do mean currently, not even a few hours after the fact) and the user has received all four warnings (in order).
2. For vandalism that is not currently under way, use WP:AN/I or another appropriate admin noticeboard for the specific problem.
After reporting it, you should notify the user on their talk page that he/she has been reported to the admins, and provide a link to the discussion. This becomes pretty much their final warning, and admins look favorably on users who are conscientious about full disclosure to the involved parties (plus it makes their job easier and faster).
Now, sit back and be patient. The admins are busy volunteers, and it takes time to investigate and verify everything you state (the more detailed you can be in your notice, the better, as long as you don't prattle on pointlessly). Usually a short block will be implemented, usually lasting only a few hours. The user will also receive a notice on their talk page that the block has been implemented and why.
Repeat offenses should be reported right away. This can sometimes take the form of an apparently different anon user (different IP address) making the same edits (or worse) in retaliation to the ban. Admins have ways of making educated guesses as to whether or not the same user is making those edits, too (thus circumventing the block). Be sure to alert the admins if this happens, because it's further evidence of "bad faith" on the part of the user, which can result in sequentially longer blocks and other actions.

Some key points to remember:

WP:AGF - Remember that some people are baffled by the technology, the English language, or other things at Wikipedia, and it might be an honest mistake. The edits taking place after the warnings will help to determine that.
WP:CIVIL - You should always remain polite and civil, both when dealing with the vandalizing user and when discussing the matter with others. (Heck, that should be the rule of thumb all the time here.)
WP:3RR - Don't revert changes more than three times within 24 hours, and aim for one or two at the most just to be safe.
WP:VAND - Not all edits you think are vandalism are actually vandalism. Some of the most frustrating edits are actually just a matter of another editor being stubborn (some would say stupidly or insanely stubborn, but you wouldn't say that, of course). :-)
WP:AIAV is only for current vandalism attacks (i.e., it's likely to be ongoing while you are reporting it to the admins), and if the user has not been properly warned through all 4 levels, the user will probably not be blocked.
WP:AN/I is a sprawling place with lots of activity and overworked volunteer admins helping out. Be patient and always be very polite when working with an admin, even if they seem a bit gruff or brusque with you. They really mean well, but they don't have a lot of time to sit around with you for a nice cup of tea and a friendly chat or sob story. Give them the information they need to make an educated decision, and then just wait.

Reverting edits

This applies really to any type of edit that needs to be "undone". The most common reason you would do this is because of vandalism, but you might even wish to do this to some of your own edits sometimes (like if you royally mess up a template that was working and after your mess with it, it's broken). You might also find this useful as a possible saving grace if you accidentally break WP:3RR, because by reverting your own most recent edit (i.e., put things back to the way the vandal left it before you did your fourth edit), some admins will cut you some slack and not block you. In short, there are many reasons you might want to revert someone's edits.

First, it's important to understand that nothing is ever really lost or deleted on Wikipedia. At the top of each article, there is a "History" button or tab (I'm assuming you use the monobook skin, which is the default interface for Wikipedia, but all the skins have a similar features somewhere on the page). Click it, and you will see the entire history of the article.

Here is an example from your history page:

# (cur) (last)  14:28, February 6, 2007 207.161.5.157 (Talk)
* (cur) (last) 08:35, February 5, 2007 Chameleon3322 (Talk | contribs)
* (cur) (last) 08:24, February 5, 2007 Chameleon3322 (Talk | contribs)
* (cur) (last) 08:13, February 5, 2007 Chameleon3322 (Talk | contribs)
* (cur) (last) 13:12, February 3, 2007 209.202.42.114 (Talk)

The (cur) and (last) are links to the differences from the current version (i.e., what's displayed now) and the version prior to the time and date listed to the right. Clicking on the date brings up the current version at that point in time. Clicking on an anonymous user's IP address brings up their contribution history (what other edits they have made). Clicking on a registered user name (like yours) takes you to that user's page. Talk and contribs take you to the registered user's talk page and contribution history respectively.

One of the handiest features did not show up in this copy/paste, and that's the ability to compare changes between any two versions. This is so handy for spotting subtle changes that are easy to miss in one-by-one comparisons. It's also useful for figuring out who added certain information (such as copyrighted materials) and when they added it (if Wikipedia had it first, maybe the other people are in violation of Wikipedia's copyright, not the other way around).

There are several tools that help you automate what I'm about to describe, but most only rollback the most recent edit, or all the edits by the last person to edit the article until a different editor's edits are encountered. This does not always fix the problem, however, especially with articles (your own userpage is probably much less complicated). Many times I have seen someone (A) add garbage, then someone (B) adds more. Someone else comes along and (C) reverts the last change (still leaving the first garbage intact). (D) More garbage is slipped in. Someone comes along and (E) makes a really good edit. Someone else (F) enhances that good edit. (G) More garbage is added. (H) And then you come along and have to decide what to do.

Ideally, at point C, that user would have checked the article's history a little more clearly and noticed that there were actually two edits that needed fixing. The best thing to do in this case, probably is to edit the historical version of the article after point E (the last good edit). Then find the A edit, and remove it from the article. Save the edited version (ignoring the warning message about editing an older version of the article), and you should have an article that includes D and E, but A, B, F, and G have been left out (C is irrelevant at this point).

I was speaking of automated tools to help with this, and there is none I can recommend more highly than Navigation popups. Once you install it, you only have to hover over a particular date in the history, wait for the popup box to appear, go to the actions menu, and click revert. It takes care of the reverting for you. It's actually much, much easier to do than it was to describe it. Though you might want to try a few manually first to get the hang of it (a personal sandbox or the public one are good places to practice). Navigation popups does a lot more than revert, and I always feel like I have lost one of my senses when I browse without it now. I wish it worked outside of Wikipedia, too!

I hope that gave you a good understanding of both topics. There are finer points to all these things, but hopefully you can avoid doing things the hard (wrong) way like I did in the beginning by reading these. If you ever find that anything I said here is wrong or has changed, please let me know. :-)

--Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 02:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...you're probably right that someone I know or someone that knows my user name edited my talk page. I should investigate. I understand how reverting works, I'll try the manual way, then try out the popup program. Thanks a lot for your help!:D 33 22 00:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Awards

Take this, you deserve it!

You've been doing some great stuff. Your enthusiasm and willingness to get stuck in is totally amazing. And you are bold, and you have great ideas. Well done!!! SilkTork 03:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

January 2007

Kudos and applause

Happy New Year! I Couldn't agree more with the spirit in WP:Wh, so I made it a shortcut and love bureaucraticite. Brilliant! Thanks for a great read. You and I have similar backgrounds, though we're on opposite coasts. If you're a chargers fan, we'll have to a Canadian like DeathPhoenix mediate our own discussions until, say 4:00 pm your timezone Sunday though!
Would love to see you move it out into wikipedia space where it truly belongs. You already have it tagged, so finish it soon, and do it. Such conscientiousness raising pieces are valuable. It's a least as good as Fred Bauder's Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not therapy.
I'm also with the WP:Wc but usually drop WP:WC on newbies which I altered sometime back to have links useful to newbie's (like lists of admins, the welcome committee members, etc.) to whom they could turn for help. (Ahem... didn't you just say something about this and this!) At that juncture, the danged people manning Help:Newcomers help page didn't want their link prominently displayed on the main help page. (Apparently, they still don't!) It's still not an ~~obvious~~ choice AGAIN (Arrrrrggghhh-- how many times does one have to fight some battles!), but FOR A TIME at least the stink I raised made 'em rethink instead of all but hiding it!
I can't believe BOTH those pages were changed recently for the worse just when I was writing you about them in one message. What're the odds!?? (Evidently, on a wiki, very good. Grrrrr)
Maybe you and I should publicize the heck out of this essay haunting all the xFD's for a few weeks and dropping the shortcut. Another concept to consider, put together some newbie help tutorials see User:Fabartus/Snooping tour... "instant skill clues", only one subst needed, thankyou. I'm sure we could attract some assistance and make a small but very worthwhile project out of it. Heck, I'm pushing 7,000 edits and I still get turned around by things— especially changes. But at least I know how to try several things so I can usually get to 'there', even when it's been moved.
I just took another (It think small) mediation case tonight I hope should go well and am mentoring/advocating on another which just calmed down for a bit at least, but I think such a project worth kicking around as a concept. Among other things, will reinforce your essay when we publicize it on the VP. I gotta run. Nice to meetchya! Best regards // FrankB 08:43, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for your kind words and support! If the Pousse Cafe article looks a little run down now, it's cuz I cut out some of its content and folded it into the new Layered drinks article. The denoted difference between the two is unclear.

Creationlaw 01:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

February 2007

Re: Award

Wow, thank you very much!! I'm really honored to receive the award, and I'm glad you decided to stay on Wikipedia (and the other Wikimedia projects). If there's anything I can do to help you, drop me a line and I'll do my best to help. Cheers, Tangotango (talk) 09:26, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sorry for the late reply, I've been off the English Wikipedia for a while due to personal time constraints. About the template you flagged for deletion in Commons, it's already been deleted, and I'm not whiz at languages or anything, but judging from the "/gu" subpage name, it might have been Gujarati :) Cheers, Tangotango (talk) 12:03, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User page

I dont really understand your user page = Please place these in the awards section

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Excellent wikipedian, excellent additions to wikipedia, and lots of them. thuglas^talk\|edits 05:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		Very impressive images of drinkwear. Much needed. thuglas^talk\|edits 05:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been alright, i still have a couple mid terms yet. So far so good! Instead of self-testing myself or tutoring others ive been adding to wikipedia as a self-test. thuglas^talk|edits 19:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thuglas would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Willscrlt to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Willscrlt/Archives. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

I figured you deserved the nomination, so i did it. But yeahh don't worry, no hard feelings at all. 24.222.119.85 05:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

I'm not sure what to say other than thank you!! I'm honoured and extremely grateful. I'll give your other projects some consideration, but for the next fortnight or so I'll be rushed off my feet one way or another so I'll be lucky if I even touch a wikipedia page for ten days or so!! I'll have a serious look when I get back. Happy-melon 21:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

shitface

fuck u24.79.132.118 15:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. I think Willscrlt is doing an excellent job, 24.79.132.118. By the way, who names their kid an IP address? That's worse than Moonunit or Apple.

I recommend retitling this section to "happyface"

Philvarner 18:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Phil. This anonymous user (thus the reason for his/her IP address appearing) is just unhappy because I reported him/her for vandalizing another user's page as well as an article. I'm kind of amazed that it took this long before someone finally decided to vandalize my page. I consider it a badge of honor for work well done. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 00:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi, I noticed you did some work on the Clan Murray clan badge, thats great. I write much of the Scottish clan articles here too but unfortunatly I was recently banned for uploading copyrighted images. However I can be un-banned by another user. Would you be able to unbann me ? I can explain how to do it. My username is Mjgm84 thanks, 195.137.109.177 12:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VP and Nardman1

Thanks for telling me your thoughts on this user. However, you are incorrect in that we do look at factors other then editcount when making approvals. Based on looking though Nardman1's contribs, he/she doesn't seem all that active in vandal fighting. If a user proves they know what they are doing when reverting vandals they may be approved before they have made 250 edits. However, this does not apply to Nardman1, and so he was not approved. We encourage him to reapply soon. Thanks, Prodego ^talk 14:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I love

your energy and enthusiasm. Wiki really needs more people like you. You do stuff, and I think that's great. I'll take a look at your ideas and get back to you. SilkTork 14:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Thanks for vouching me for Vandalproof. I know I've neglected your project...It just seems there's nothing that really catches my eye. Maybe if you could point me to specific articles I could clean up I'd get some motivation. Nardman1 19:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

November 2006

List of people by name: Tur

Thanks for your carefully thot thru and carefully stated questions re List of people by name: Tur. Please forgive my being terse: you deserve a quick response, and it's hard for me to be anything but terse without using more time than i have right now, and probably using up more of your time than is reasonable.

What i call the "low-resolution terminology" is aimed at fulfilling the navigational role of LoPbN. Ideally, each entry would have
1. The lk
2. The inverted name, to aid the eye in seeing whether the entry it's on is before or after the one sought
3. Something, as short as possible, that the searcher is likely to know about their guy that is not true of any other entry with the same name or a name close enough to be mistaken for their guy -- but only if there is at least one name confusable with the person sought.
Users who look at LoPbN to find out how to spell someone's name, or what made them famous, are misguided: they should go on to the bio article. (And it might be good for someone good at saying that in an encyclopedic fashion to do so on the root page of the tree, and maybe even link to that section in a note on every page.) Putting in an entry information that is not crucial to navigation is clutter that impedes navigation to adjacent bios (and maybe even the one sought), and encourages misconceptions about what the list is useful for.

Practically that minimal scheme is unworkable, for at least two reasons: adding in additional distinctions as new entries that are confusable appear is a finicky and large maintenance task that IMO would always be seriously behind, and the variability of detail among entries would encourage the hypothesis that what makes a good entry is best left to the editor who adds it to decide -- i.e., encourage many editors to decide it by whim.
AFAI can see, the optimum practical scheme is to put a very small amount of information down that is nevertheless redundant for 90% of entries and sufficient for 95 to 99%, namely
- vital stats
- nationality
- occupation (or other role where inapplicable) in which notability accrued.
I try to deal with the remaining 1 to 5% in a clearly divergent format: "American politician" usually suffices (for everyone from mayors to heads of state), but where it doesn't i will suffix, e.g. " -- Florida" or " -- Congress", intentionally using the double hyphen that doesn't otherwise appear in entries, so it stands out as an exception. My hope is that the reader & potential editor takes away the impression that v.s., nat, occ'n is as much as they should worry about grasping, and not worry about why 1 to 5% violate that. My key concern is that they not be faced with a chaotic-looking population of entries where three adjacent entries seldom conform to the same format.
Yes, you pretty well got it. The point i think you missed is that a J - Jo range is something i strictly avoid, to the extent of creating pages like List of people by name: name Ca to isolate even a single entry. A J - Jo range is not so bad, except that if that is acceptable why not a Turney - Turnq range or a How to Hug [chuckle] one, or whatever it takes to make all the sections about 25 entries? Because for pages of about 25x25 600 names, finding your way thru such a ToC would be distracting and annoying compared to clean steps thru a hierarchy that basically reflects one additional letter per level.
My practices are IMO most vulnerable to criticism in cases like Welsh. I think i may have settled on nationality, in the sense that (in the cases moderns) corresponds to passport, in response to the guidelines on lead sentence of bios -- WP:MOSBIO? In any case, the key again is navigation, and while 191 nationalities are too many (how many people can keep Dominica separate from the Dominican Republic, or the two Congos, Guinea and the Guianas), sticking to them avoids users saying "no, that Catalan musician can't be the right Casals, i know he's Spanish, etc. "Welsh" is a finer distinction than "Scottish", and "Cornish" still finer, and the tribal or linguistic ethnicities of many countries (ironically, both the states of India and North American Indian tribes come to mind) are far too many for users to keep of, or more to the point, to be useful for navigation. I waver on this; some days i'd put "British Welsh" and some days just "British"; i'm not sure whether i stick to "American Puerto Rican" because of Puerto Ricans who wouldn't stand for just "American" or because some of our readers may think there is such a thing as Puerto Rican passports. In any case, the bottom line logically should be that an ethnicity alone is likely to be confusing and a passport nationality is more likely to be recognized and useful.

As to the writer or whatever Jack Turner, you sound better informed than i, and i'll be glad to try to remember to leave it as you settle on. The "klunky" term was no doubt an issue for me: too many words for something involving so little specialization that any actor or journalist would probably stand in quite effectively. But there are seldom perfect LoPbN occupation terms.
(Terse? Well, it might be worse if i hadn't tried.)
--Jerzy•t 05:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the great explanation. I take it that these are largely your own views and opinions, but I think they are very good rules of thumb. Any new entries I add, I will attempt to follow your lead. The "passport" method of choosing a country does make a lot of sense. (Assuming, of course, that you know that a person from Wales would have a British passport.) I am still a little unclear about when you divide a large group into smaller sections. I think I will leave that alone for now, and let you make those decisions until I become more experienced. --Willscrlt 09:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

_ _ Thanks for asking.

_ _ My logic is that only editors need to know that (so they can put the passport nationality into the entry), and that readers are more likely to know he's British w/o knowing he's Welsh than to be in the reverse state of partial ignorance: if you know he's Welsh and see "British" on LoPbN, no matter what you know abt passports, you're likely to realize that all Welsh are also British, and say "that could very well be him"; if you know he's British and LoPbN says "Welsh", you may have heard of other British people, but never even heard the word "Welsh" except as a verb or having something to do with beer and melted cheese, and go away thinking we probably don't have an article on him (or think we haven't gotten to adding him to LoPbN, which sadly is likely: i think we're at 5-20% completion. (And while i add entries, my principal contribution is encouraging consistency by making consistency as visible as possible, and keeping the entries accessible in spite of the unabated growth, by subdividing sections and pages, and working toward making it more feasible for others than myself to participate in the maintenance of structure rather than just content.)

_ _ If you're interested enough, look at the ToC on the same page every time you see a really small section: it's usually bcz it doesn't have next to it any sections that it can comfortably merge with. And also look at {{List of people by name exhaustive page-index (sectioned)}}, which is essentially a ToC w/ a lk to each page in the tree; unlike pages, which often have potential ranges that lack a corresponding section, there is a page for every name except very short uncommon names that don't have a "Name Xxx" link. But i gotta run.
--Jerzy•t 01:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

December 2006

thanks

thanks for niticing that typo, i go fix that now -- BrianEd 04:57, December 17, 2006

Um. Sure. Which typo? Also, please remember to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~) to help people know who and when made the comments. Thanks. --Willscrlt 01:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

B-52 (cocktail) rewrite

Your rewrite of B-52 (cocktail) is very well done. I didn't think the original page could be saved (and it was deleted several times, I think), but you created a good article. Quale 19:03, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Coming from you (re: our previous discussions on Backdraft (drink)), that means a lot. This is why I said that I just need some time to do the research necessary to improve the articles. It might seem that I have slowed down a bit here, but I have been doing a lot of work over at Commons, WikiBooks, and within the WikiProject Cocktails to help create an infrastructure that works well. It should make it much easier to move things around wherever they need to go, expand or compile the information together, and so on. It just takes time, and now, it seems that people are holding back a bit on the AFDs and prods, which is really helping me to get some real work done on the Project. And that is something I really appreciate. :-) I also appreciate the thanks, because this has mostly been a pretty thankless job. I'm just happy to be improving Wikipedia and making a little corner of cyberspace a better place. --Willscrlt 01:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to finally reply to a message you left on my talk page to let you know that I'm not an admin. My visits to Wikipedia have been kind of spotty as of late, so I'm not as prompt replying to notes left on my talk page as I should be. Good luck with your ongoing work on the cocktail/mixed drink articles. Quale 09:56, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Alexander (cocktail) Prod

I've responded to your comments at my user talk page. Could you let me know which articles you're planning on dealing with, so I can get rid of the Wikibooks cleanup tag? Thanks, and happy new year to you too. theProject 18:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

January 2007

"an" herb

I noticed you disagreed with my changing "an herb" to "a herb". That's fine, it's not completely clear what's correct, it depends on the pronunciation. But it's not "proper English" to use "an" before h. Some americans say "erb", in which case it's fine to write "an herb", but if you pronounce the h, it should be "a herb". Admittedly, it's partly a US vs. Brittish english thing.

A source on this would be http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutgrammar/hotel?view=uk

AskOxford is a part of the Oxford Univerity, so they would have some knowledge of the matter, even if there could be a discussion.

MacLaurin 14:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[EDIT: ooops, forgot to mention: It's about a change you made in the Vermouth entry]

Red Ferrari

Sorry. I was planning on writing something about it, but i don't really have much to write and I don't feel like being rushed to do so. I did not know if i should contribute but i figured if someone wanted to nitpick, they could. a bad contrib is better than no contribs, remove it if you wish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thuglas (talk • contribs) January 24, 2007

My suggestion would be to simply change the link into a bold heading, follow it with a hyphen or dash ("-") and then list the most essential ingredients and simplest of preparation steps in the list itself. Later on, after you have the time to develop and source the real encyclopedic article, you can replace that basic information with a link to the newly created article. This provides useful information right now, and makes it easy to add in more information in the future. Just the name of a drink does not really provide any information. When you do created the Red Ferrari article it would be a good idea to add a disambiguation link at the top to the Ferrari automobile. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 00:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright I'll do that, but I'm not too sure what a bold heading is.... The 'red ferrari' is not a very widely spread drink, but I have seen people order it in 3 different provinces cross-canada. I do have numerous books and such on mixed drinks so I think I could help out a bit. Perhaps this would be a way to keep myself away from politically heated articles where i can loose my temper. 'cheers' thuglas^talk|edits 01:16, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Yeah its really good, try it. I'm going to start editing more but i need a little break to catch up in school work. thuglas^talk|edits 18:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot 9 January 2007

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Michelada; Virgin Mary (cocktail); Giovanni Lindo Ferretti; Pretectum; Cricket Cola; Count Cola; Grenadine; Kamikaze (cocktail); Red Kola; Fruit cocktail; Blogroll; Rola Cola; Ciliary ganglion; Frescolita; TuKola; Cocktail shaker; Breizh Cola; Highball glass; Cosmonaut (cocktail)

Cleanup: White Trash (band); Bandai Museum; Compact fluorescent lamp
Merge: Monopropellant; Lead shot; Soggy biscuit
Add Sources: Champagne flute; Inca Kola; Cachaça
Wikify: Wayne Thiebaud; Last Comic Standing; Cocktail drum
Expand: Mentha; Ape Escape 2; Supreme Clientele

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 19:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot 11 January 2007

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Champagne flute; Virgin Mary (cocktail); Rose Kennedy Cocktail; Michelada; Cricket Cola; The Keg; Pretectum; Kamikaze (cocktail); Giovanni Lindo Ferretti; Ciliary ganglion; Highball glass; Teenybopper; Irish Cream; Cocktail stick; GI Cocktail; Fruit cocktail; Cocktail onion; Hans Dulfer; Cocktail shaker

Cleanup: White Trash (band); Bandai Museum; Roach clip
Merge: Glogg; Soggy biscuit; Flag of England
Add Sources: Mint Julep; Salmiakki Koskenkorva; Inca Kola
Wikify: Cocktail drum; Wayne Thiebaud; One People's Project
Expand: Mentha; Ape Escape 2; Supreme Clientele

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 00:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Templates

January 2007

Category:cocktail stubs → Category:mixed drink stubs

I've renamed this per your suggestion. I didn't realize your wikiproject hadn't been renamed yet: be a bit embarrassing if you change your minds halfway through... At any rate, my offer still stands if there are any remaining maintenance categories you need bot-depoulated, re-populated, listified, or anything else along those lines. Alai 01:37, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Cocktail template

A little (ok very large and comprehensive) thought I've been having that I've only just got round to committing to Wiki. From reading some of what you've written in various places it would seem that something along these lines is somewhere down your list of things to do: I hope I'm not stealing any thunder or upsetting a carefully arranged timetable; but it would seem to be something I could be getting on with while you're continuing your fantastic work on the main list. Also, since you seem to have a thorough grasp of template coding and mine is all but nonexistent, I'd appreciate your assistance in coding it up (assuming that you're not going to breathe fire all over the proposal of course, which you're quite entitled to do if it seems to be sending the project in an unwanted direction). Happy-melon 13:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's great that you came up with this proposal, and you are right that I have been thinking about something similar for quite a while (since early December in fact). I hope you do not mind, but I somewhat significantly tweaked your proposal. Having gone through a few deletion processes, I don't want to reinvent the wheel only to have the new wheel deleted. Infoboxes are the standard way to present the information you describe, so that's how I suggested we implement your suggestions. I also moved the discussion under Wikipedia:WikiProject Cocktails/Templates/Proposals.

I certainly do not mind coding the template, but honestly, I think this would be a good template for you to cut your teeth on, since there are so many good examples of infoboxes around to copy. I also setup a framework within the WikiProject area for you to start development at any time you feel comfortable. We might want to get a little more feedback before actually coding, which will also give you time to look around and find infoboxes that are really good (there are several that are not so good, too). Especially look at other Food and Drink ones, so that we can all kind of match a bit. Also look for good color schemes (even if nothing else about the template is good), so we can get some ideas. I made one suggestion, but there might be much better examples of color schemes out there. When you feel it's ready to move from discussion to development, just move the table in the Proposals page to the new heading and start coding. There's really no standard policy for creating new templates, but it's a pain if it gets nominated for deletion after putting a lot of work into it. That's why thinking and discussing things first with as many experienced Wikipedians as possible is a good idea.

I hope you do not mind these changes or moves. This is not only my WikiProject, but everyone who wants to be involved. I do have good ideas on organizing things in a logical manner, and I've also gained some experience in how to do things wrong here at Wikipedia. Each time I learn something new, I try to avoid similar problems in the future. That's why I made the changes I did. I hope that's fine with you. I really appreciate your involvement in this Project. I am becoming much more excited about the work again, knowing that I'm not in this alone anymore. --Willscrlt (Talk|Cntrb) 02:53, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beer cocktails

That's an awesome template. Do you want to come over to the beer project and have a chat with the guys there who are working on templates. We haven't got any sort of agreements yet - still just muddling through. But your enthusiasm, work ethic, imagination, creativity and template knowledge would be of immense value. SilkTork 14:46, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer SilkTork 14:47, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox WikiProject

Saw your recent cleanup work on {{Infobox WikiProject}}. Thanks!

I've gotten a few requests for variables to optionally change the image and infobox sizes. I'd like to get some feedback on them, so if you have a chance to use those options anywhere that you've been include this infobox, let me know what you think. --EvilSuggestions 22:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About Agua loca

I'll try to remember to use the special template, but I'm not around much anyway. YechielMan 20:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

February 2007

TfD nomination of Template:USERNAME

Template:USERNAME has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. If nothing else, the catgory and usage is insufficient. Without a proper category, no one else can find it and use it widely. -- Best regards // FrankB 19:28, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

referencing apostrophes

How does one do a link to a section with an apostrophe, such as the Planter's Punch section on the Other classic cocktails page? I tried a few things, but it wouldn't handle it correctly (just links to page, not to section). Philvarner

I think in the past I have just linked to them like normal. However, you can try copy/pasting from the page's URL (you might need to click on the specific heading in the TOC to update the URL to reflect the correct section. Or try substituting %27; or %39; (I forget which one is the ASCII equivalent to an apostrophe. Seriously, though, I don't remember having any problems linking to sections with apostrophe's in the past. Are you sure there isn't something else there that might be causing the problem? --Willscrlt (Talk) 10:55, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User adoptions

January 2007

Consider Adoption...please.

Hello, Willscrlt. I was just wondering, I am fairly new to Wikipedia and would like to know more about it. If you would consider adopting me, once you have decided please contact me via my Talk Page.Thanks. Chameleon3322 02:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't actually have special needs it's only when I'm editing and I don't know if what I'm doing is wrong or I don't know how to do a specific task. That's when I need someone to go to and ask, and I'm really hoping that would be you. Chameleon3322 21:00, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Willscrlt, um... Could you adopt me?

Hi! I was just wondering, would you mind adopting me? In the Wikipedia Adoption thingy obviously, not as a parent or anything. I've been with Wikipedia for a while, but I haven't really done a lot except grammar checks and some small other stuff.

This isn't something I've entered into lightly you know. I've been looking round, and you seem to be the most suitible. I was so freaked out when I read you have Scottish and Irish descent. I have too! And you're in California as well. My dad has an uncle that lives there, and is of Scottish and Irish descent. Okay, I know, it's probably not you... but still, it is pretty cool. Oh, I'm a book-lover too. :D

Um, the first thing I need help with is how to unprotect a page. I was reading somewhere that you can protect pages, and I protected my userpage a while ago, just to practise... and now I can't find the page that had information on how to unprotect it so it's kinda stuck.

O2mcgovem 02:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yay!

Hey, Thanks for adopting! I'm so honoured... really, I am. I never knew you could email people, that's weird. Okay, from this point on, no posting potentially sensitive information on Wikipedia talk pages.

Oh, and I worked out the Protected thingy a different way, or at least I think I did. It was kinda a mistake really, I was trying to show you off to the world by adding a userbox saying you adpoted me and I came across this {{sp... something or other}} at the top of my userpage and deleted it. After saving, I checked and my page was unprotected. I think it is anyway, the padlock's gone. Is it unprotected now? Or do I still need to do those steps you sent me?

O2mcgovem 21:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I have long periods where I'm online, and equally as long periods where I'll just randomly disappear for what seems like eternity. Please don't be upset or offended if I don't reply to anything, I'm not ignoring you :D

And one last thing, Happy Belated Christmas and Happy Belated New Year.

Sounds tasty...

Thanks, but I probably can't get involved in a WikiProject for a while yet. I'm about to embark on some "hardcore revision" before my final exams. Oh, I'll be off to uni next. Can't wait. :D

Anyway, let's keep to topic of the Wikipedianess. User pages are not personal profiles, you know. I see you're already in the Ice Cream WikiProject anyway, lol. I'm going to put one of those boxes on my page too, mainly because I do just love ice-cream (there's this chocolate stuff in Sainsbury's, omg, it's lovely, seriously. You have to try it. It's like Hagan-daaz[sp], but at a much cheaper price).

Anyway, I'll be offline till Thursday I think. Sorry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by O2mcgovem (talk • contribs) 23:07, 29 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Yeah, I signed up with the Ice Cream WikiProject (and created the userbox for the project, too) after mentioning it on your talk page. Good luck on your exams. I'm sure I'll be around here still when you return later this week. Have a good one! --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 23:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

February 2007

Forgetful me

I completely forgot to report the vandalism done to the St. Ignatius of Loyola article, and to add the template on their talk page. Hopefully I'll remember that for my next (I hope it's not too soon) encounter with vandalism. On the other hand, I made my first revert (I think)! I understand the whole reverting thing. Wow, I'm not exactly a low-maintainence adoptee am I? Aside from that, Thank you so much for helping me!. You've been a great mentor, teacher, adopter, whatever you want to call it, you have been awesome.33 22 17:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert was perfect. No problem about the forgetting it. It's a process, and there are several steps. No worries. That's why this is a community. We help each other out and we work together to resolve problems. --Willscrlt (Talk) 10:51, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you were adopting

I just joined Wikipedia today, but ive been looking at it for a long time. If you still have some spots open, Can you adopt me? :D

P3whitelighter 23:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProjects

General

January 2007

No Problem...

Thanks for tweaking my user page, I don't mind it all. What's a Wikipedian without editing? I got lost in your words, but i got it all...kind of. One question that has been running around in my mind (a little less than other questions) what's a WikiProject? Chameleon3322 23:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am sorry if anything I said confused you.

A WikiProject is a group of editors who work together toward maintaining and improving all of the articles within a certain scope or topical area. There are very broad groups (History, Culture, etc.) and very specific ones (Heroes TV show or ice cream). Other WikiProjects focus more on helping users instead of helping the articles (Adopt-a-User, Kindness Campaign, Mediation Cabal). Some WikiProjects are very casual, while others create fairly complex rules for participants/members (both terms are used) to follow. The most successful projects seem to strike a balance between the two extremes. Usually the participants have some knowledge in the topic, or at least a strong interest, but this is not a requirement. Some projects are picky about how many edits you have made and types of administrative actions have been taken against you (usually only the ones where you are offering to help mentor other users, because a bad mentor does not help the new user become a good Wikipedian). The WikiProjects I am most involved with are very accepting of new and experienced members--basically anyone who wants to pitch in and help is welcome. (Food & Drink, Mixed Drinks, Soft Drinks, Ice Cream, Herbs & Spices, and the Kindness Campaign) Other WikiProjects are very welcoming, too. So why the need for a WikiProject? Well, there are several. By collaborating with others, it becomes easier to prioritize and plan how to be most efficient at improving and cleaning up articles. It helps lessen the work required of any one editor, by focusing the efforts of several editors together with the same goals. It provides more eyes to watch over the articles to help keep vandalism and inaccuracy to a minimum. Working together, project participants can sometimes improve an article threatened with deletion enough that the article is saved from deletion. It is also a way to be social and have fun at Wikipedia, which can otherwise be a bit of an isolated experience (or sometimes it can even feel adversarial). By working together, you develop a sense of community that is a little more personal than the overall Wikipedia community, yet is in harmony with the greater community. In short, WikiProjects are fun, functional, and focused ways to improve Wikipedia.

I hope that cleared things up for you a bit. :-) If you have any other questions, please ask. I do not mind. Have a great day! --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 03:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Mixed Drinks

Formerly WikiProject Cocktails

December 2006

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cocktails template placement

You seem to have misunderstood the part of Wikipedia:WikiProject_best_practices#Recruiting about placing templates. These go on article talk pages, not on article pages. On article pages it would become a self-reference, which should be avoided: Wikipedia:Avoid self-references. Please move these to article talk pages. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 15:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing that out. Part of the reason I (apparently mistakenly) did that, is because articles keep being deleted faster than they can be merged or cleaned up. I was hoping that by seeing those, people would leave things alone long enough to get the house cleaning finished. Suggestions? --Willscrlt 15:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I only saw it on Old Fashioned ... which I'm watching because I saved it from an AfD a while ago. :-) Unfortunately, the only thing you can do is put the cocktail pages on your watch list, and that way, if someone tags them for deletion, with AfD or ProD, you'll know, and can respond individually. If you don't have time to fix all the articles being nominated at once, fix the ones you can, and remember the others (with a list, for example). Then, when you get the time, you can recreate them one at a time with adequate rewriting. At any time, you can ask an administrator (say, me), for a copy of deleted content - even a deleted page isn't gone forever. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 15:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just finished reading the Wikipedia:Avoid self-references article. I can see that I need to go back and clean up several articles now. *sigh* Two steps forward, one step back. Here are a few articles that have been deleted that would be good to see the contents to see if there is anything worth merging:

I know there were more that were deleted, but I have already wiped out their links. At some point I will peruse back through the history and may dig up some more, if that is okay with you. --Willscrlt 16:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dirty Diaper- nope, never was such an article. Alternate spelling, perhaps?
Fuzzy Navel - ditto
Gorilla Fart - User:Willscrlt/Gorilla Fart
Hairy Virgin - nope
Martian Hard On - nope. Are you sure you're not just making fun of me?
Three Wise Men (cocktail) - User:Willscrlt/Three Wise Men (cocktail)

AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 13:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. Nope. Not making fun of you, I promise. They were probably links to disambiguation pages or the wrong articles entirely. All I know is they linked somewhere, and that somewhere isn't there any longer. Thanks for the two you did find.

After I am finished with those pages, how do I delete them? I really don't want a Gorilla Fart hanging around my user space. :-) --Willscrlt 21:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can ask me (on my user page), and I'll delete them. You can also mark them for speedy deletion, ({{db-userreq}}, see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#User pages) and another admin can do it. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 13:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cocktails and sprits

If Wikiproject cocktails also covers other alcoholic drinks, why not just rename the project and officially broaden its scope? Stevage 04:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent question, and one I have asked myself. The main reason I have not done so is that I do not wish to step on anyones toes or give the appearance of being a power hungry dictator. ;-) Right now, I am the most active member of the WikiProject Cocktails (by probably hundreds of edits), and just doing the editing is keeping me plenty busy. The work needs to be done, and that is why I am doing it. Expanding or renaming a project is something that I think really needs to be a group decision, and it should probably be discussed higher up the project chain at the WikiProject Food and Drink level. I have already expanded the Project's scope considerably just through the process of tracking down and fixing the huge variety of problems. I could really use help, and will be very appreciative of any help people offer. :-)

What I would really prefer to see is the WikiProject Cocktails renamed to WikiProject Mixed Drinks, so that it more clearly covers beer mixes, wine mixes, shots, drink mixes, mixers, and odd ball drinks like eggnog. I think that there are more than enough liquors out there that there should be a separate sister project, like there are for Beer and Wine. Like I said, the only reason I tagged the liqours I did was because nobody else seems to be working on them, and since Cocktails is doing major cleanup now, I figured it was more helpful to the article than leaving it semi-generically tagged with drink-stub. It's not a control thing. If a sister project or anyone else wants to clean it up, re-tag it with another project tag, or whatever, I would be very happy for them to do so. It's all about doing what is best for Wikipedia and keeping ego and irrational behavior (rashness, spite, blind reliance upon precident instead of considering each situation on its own merits, etc.) out of the decision making process. --Willscrlt 06:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I'm not worried if it's a "control thing" or not. More power to you for doing the work. I guess I just like things to be named "appropriately". Keep up the good work anyway. Stevage 06:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cocktails and AFD

Hi. I have read your suggestion that the cocktails project be allowed to work on all cocktails articles for a while and then the project itself will nominate cocktail articles for deletion. I probably should have replied somewhere explaining why I'm not in full agreement with this approach, as otherwise you have no way to know whether I was aware of your efforts or if I might simply be ignoring you. I didn't respond in the past primarily because although I don't agree with all of your points, I respect them, and it was my guess that you probably wouldn't be persuaded by my views.

I am rarely persuaded by off-the-cuff remarks and "easy" answers. However, a well thought out response always gets my attention and full consideration. Even if we disagree, rest assured that I truly respect everything you took the time to write me, and I appreciate it very much. Hopefully we can come to more agreements than disagreements. :-)

You often refer to "hundreds" of articles under the cocktails project umbrella. I am only concerned with articles in Category:Cocktails and its immediate subcategories, except for Category:Mixed drink shooters and drink shots which I consider a lost cause and never look at. There aren't (and in my opinion shouldn't be) hundreds of articles here.

Ha ha. At least we pretty much agree about the Shots -- what a mess.

There are 344 articles in my watchlist. Nearly all of them are related to cocktails, though I also have wine, beer, a few user talk pages, and miscellaneous articles linking to cocktails. Assuming that only 2/3 of the articles are actually cocktail articles that should be listed under the category, that would still leave 230 cocktails, which is technically "hundreds". And believe me, when you are trying to review and edit all those articles it certainly feels like hundreds. The big problem is that a large number of the articles have never been properly categorized. My first priority has been to work my way through each one, categorizing as I go. I am also tagging them as stubs and expands, and now I am going to start tagging many as micr-stubs. Those micro-stubs are essentially the ones I feel are worthless articles that contain scraps of useful info that should be inserted into the List or into Wikibooks before the article is dumped. As I complete that process, you will see the number of cocktails within the categories continuing to climb toward the 230+ articles to which I refer.

Articles like Backdraft (drink) are awful, and in my opinion should be deleted. WP:V is non-negotiable. There are no references in the article, even after several months. Your research in WP:AFD isn't an adequate substitute for in article references. Furthermore, your own research can't confirm any of the claims in the article, and so it should be deleted. If an encyclopedic article meeting WP:V using WP:RS reliable sources can be created for the backdraft cocktail, my opinion is that it would be much better to start from scratch than leave the current abomination in the edit history. (I see now that Backdraft (drink) has been given two references, but both references are recipes, and neither reference supports any claim made on the page. Incredible.)

Actually, I have reached pretty much the same conclusion as you. It is now my intention to ultimately delete that article and a few other flaming ones. Before I do that, I want to consolidate them all together into a new flaming beverages article, and I will use aspects of the Backdraft (drink) as illustrations within the article. Once that is completed, the article will become only a bad memory. Unless, in the process of researching that article, I come across a wealth of information (highly unlikely) that will make the article worthy of continued inclusion. The problem with the AfD process is it only gives me 5 days (less if I do not notice the article is being considered for deletion) to figure out what I am going to do with it. It took me nearly two weeks to come to the conclusion I just described, and after two more weeks, I may change my mind again as I become more familiar with the library of articles Wikipedia contains. The only example I can compare it to, would be being hired as a new Librarian. My job is to go through the Library's collection, weeding out the bad books, repairing the ones worth saving, and highlighting the ones that are exceptional. While I am trying to do that, people randomly wander into the library, grab a book off the shelf, pour gasoline on it, and ignite it. I chase after the book with a fire extinguisher, hoping I can save the book from being destroyed. Then, once the flames are out, I can look inside the book and make a determination if the book was even worth saving or not.

I originally thought of myself as likely to be an inclusionist. I am probably still leaning more that way than toward a deletionist attitude. However, after reading recipe after recipe, after one or two liners that don't even qualify as recipies, I am taking a rather dim view of this "library's" collection of articles. That is why I have stated that at the end of the cleanup process, a mass deletion is due. Bring your marshmallows, cuz there is going to be a book burning bonfire (of the virtual kind anyway).

It is a community guideline that recipes alone do not make encyclopedia articles (WP:NOT). This means that I do not find keep arguments such as "I found a recipe on google", and "it's in the 1001 Cocktail Recipes book" the least bit persuassive. (Other AFD participants have different/lower standards.) By it's very nature, a cocktails book with 1001 recipes isn't very selective, so it provides a lousy source for anything. The entire, "WP is not a recipe book" argument is rejected by some people. It isn't my intent to argue that point here, but I can give you one example why I agree with WP:NOT. The Joy of Cooking has several thousand recipes, and qualifies as a WP:RS reliable source. I do not want every recipe in The Joy of Cooking to have an article, and it is only one of tens of thousands of cookbooks. Compare this with "I found it in 1001 Cocktail Recipes". To allow recipe articles in wikipedia is an extraordinarily bad idea.

Believe it or not, I do agree with you. Let's fast forward to March 1st, and here's how I envision the Project's pages to look.

The List of cocktails will contain only a) links to full articles, with possibly a little disambiguation information to help people find the right one; 2) links to b:Bartending/Cocktails recipes that were not able to prove WP:NOTABLE, WP:V, and WP:RS enough to warrant an encyclopedic article; and 3) an entry without a link that includes a brief summary of key ingredients and notable/verifiable pieces of information that is interesting, but nowhere enough to warrant an article. This is similar to the way I have morphed the List now, but after another round of pruning and validating.
Articles will follow a standard template that prompts for drink history; etomology of the name; notable references from history, pop culture, and/or celebrities; recipies only where they serve to illustrate an important point; hopefully a photo of each drink; and optional sections for trivia, see also, and external links. Each required section must contain at least a paragraph of verifiable information, with good sources cited. Exactly meeting that definition would quailfy an article as an "expand", meaning it's okay, but could still use improvement. Anything less (i.e., a key element is missing), would qualify as a stub. Any article that contains only a recipie, possibly with a one- or two-liner description, or sounds entirely questionable, would be classified as a micro-stub. Micro-stubs would be culled for any useful info (back into the main List or transwikied to Wikibooks if there is a full recipe), and then be mass deleted.
Categories would be fixed to sort beer and wine mixes out from true cocktails. I see no point in keeping moonshine or other pitifully small categories, especially when the listed articles are inferior. A single category of Cocktails with less common spririts would do fine for holding the miscellaneous ones.
Shots... um... I still haven't come up with a good way to deal with those dang things yet.

Most cocktail articles have a serious WP:V and WP:RS problems. Backdraft (drink) is a poster child for blatantly ignoring WP:V. The few cocktail articles that are sourced typically run afoul of WP:RS, as seen in Carbomb (beer mix), which provides no source that uses the page title (sources always call it "Irish Car Bomb"), and which uses anonymous web forum postings as sources. Feh.

Agreed again. In fact, the entire article reads like a thinly disguised attempt to slur certain Irish groups. On the other hand, if it is part of a viable drinking culture, it would be a mistake to remove the article. The question is whether or not reliable sources can be found. Even if not, I'd remain on the fence on that particular article (inclusionist leanings kicking in, I guess). In short, if the article can be made to meet the requirements of an expand article without being adequately referenced, I would not add it to the bonfire. I would look at that as an article needing ongoing work after the initial cleanup. I am enough of a a realist to recognize that the Cleanup Project is only a rough hack to remove the most horriblly offensive items from the Wikipedia. Once the obvious crud is removed, it will be time to look at the remaining articles in much finer detail. When that time comes, it will be time to roll out a classification of articles (A, B, C+, C, etc.) like other Projects do. Even after that, deletions will likely continue to occur as we fail to find verifiable information and can no longer justify keeping articles once they have been completely reviewed. Right now, there just isn't enough time to do that.

The cocktails project doesn't have an exclusive patent on cocktail articles—cocktail articles are not a walled garden inside wikipedia. In fact it doesn't require any particular expertise in cocktails to identify cocktail pages that are non-encyclopedic garbage. Although I am a cocktail aficionado, that has little to do with the cocktail pages I have listed on AFD.

I know. And this is the biggest challenge I face. I fully realize that there is no reason that anyone should make any special exemptions or bend procedures (let alone any established guidelines or policies) just because it would make my life easier. I do believe that everything must be done within the intent of the law, so to speak. I do say intent of the law, not the letter of the law, though. Since the intention of the guidelines and policies (the law) are to improve Wikipedia and keep it accurate and relavent, I do not see that requesting a "wait and see" attitude of a very specific period is going against the intent of the law. I hope that through my continued efforts (and hopefully soon the efforts of others, helping more, too), I will prove that the time was well worth it. I have no illusions of magically turning every article into a masterpiece. I just want to be sure that every article is given a fair chance.

You point out that "it doesn't require any particular expertise in cocktails" to determine if things are bad. I say, maybe so, and maybe not. The expertise is like the Librarian in my illustration. Anyone could walk into the library and say that all books under 30 pages are too short and must be purged. Another person might say that only works by certain authors are worth keeping. Others might claim that any book containing sex must be banned. The librarian is the only one who knows the collection well enough to know which books help the library to be well rounded and most useful to all the visitors. We have an advantage here that libraries do not: we can cut, paste, and edit good pieces of bad articles into other articles making much better articles. That does require a little bit of expert knowledge. Not in being an expert in cocktails (because you are probably more of one than I, since I drunk very few in my life), but being an expert in the collection of articles. For example, you felt that my estimate of number of articles was highly inflated. Having gone through and added every cocktail listed on the List of cocktails to my watchlist, I had performed a bit of reasearch into the collection, and I gained a little expert knowledge on the state of the collection that an average person does not have. Likewise, I found some candidate articles to receive useful bits of articles that do not stand alone, but would dovetail in nicely with other articles. Again, if I had not gone through the entire collection, I would have seen a crappy article with no redeeming properties.

Once somewhere I saw you mention that the cocktails project would tag bad cocktails pages for speedy deletion after review and merge. That isn't actually how the process works, since a project requested deletion is not a WP:CSD criterion for speedy deletion. The cocktail project will have to either {{prod}} the bad cocktail pages, which in my experience is most often removed by some knucklehead, or go through the regular AFD process. In my view I'm saving you some work down the line.

Ha ha. Thank you. I appreciate that. To be honest, I have already sent some articles on to the great bit bucket in the sky simply because it seemed useless to keep articles around after they had been culled of useful information (if there actually was any). When I started writing that stuff, I was not as familiar with the deletion processes as I am now (and they still can be a bit baffling at times). Given your observations, I will do that more often as pages are cleared out. Part of why I was suggesting the other alternative was to give others within the Project a chance to voice opinions as we went. I did not want to be the Project, nor do I have any desire to be a dictator. This leads to your next point...

I appreciate your enthusiasm on the cocktails project because the articles need a lot of work. Unfortunately there don't seem to be too many other active participants, so you are working practically alone. This makes me unsure that the March 2007 deadline will be met.

Tell me about it. :-( If this was a topic I was passionate about, I might be happier to be running a one-man show (though I'd be far less objective about it, I'm sure). As it is, my passion is strictly for Wikipedia and doing what needs to be done to make Wikipedia better for everyone. I think I would call it "dogged determination" instead of "enthusiasm". I will be returning to college in January, and my free time may suddenly evaporate, and if that happens, I will feel very bad for deserting the project, let alone taking a hit in my Wiki-reputation for failing to keep a committment. That being said, I am very good at following through on my committments, and I have regularly undertaken (and succeded where others thought I'd certainly fail) more work than sane people seem to do.

In any case I don't think the rest of wikipedia has to stop while the cocktails project works on a bunch of really bad pages. The AFD process runs 5 days, so the project should have enough time to merge or improve pages nominated for deletion. Remember that the wikipedia admin who closes the AFD is free to consider whether the page is substantially improved over the version that was nominated for deletion. Admins have been known to keep pages that had consensus delete votes if the page has been greatly improved during the AFD process.

The problem with AfDs, prods, etc. is that they interrupt my work flow. Instead of being able to complete the tasks I need to complete, in the order I need to complete them, to be sure I will complete the cleanup project by the deadline, I am forced to deal with articles out of order, and often before I know where the information should be placed. Additionally, an article that is iffy, but could be improved enough to qualify as a stub or an expand, would likely be deleted without discussion once an AfD goes against it. While that might be useful in many cases, it defeats the ability to tag the articles for ongoing review and improvement after the cleanup project ends. A successful AfD is essentially a kiss of death for articles that might be made good if there was enough time to improve them. However, that is not something I can often tell at the time the AfD comes up. As a result, I dig in and fight for keeping the article (unless it is blatantly obvious that the article is pure crap). I figure at least that way, the article can live long enough to improve it or reach a reasonable deletion decision. Chances are, that's not the way that AfD is supposed to be used, but that's what ends up happening.

To put it another way, if I am going to make the deadline, I have to keep working through the entire List of cocktails to salvage as much good stuff as I can. I don't have time to stop everything, and fix a potentially unfixable article at that time, especially when that article may still be deleted anyway. Doing so would be a complete waste of my time and suck out the remaining interest I have in completing this project. If I can keep working straight through, I should have little problem meeting the goals I have described. If I can find some like-minded people to help, things should really start cooking.

I think our goals are pretty much similar, although I don't think that Incredible Hulk (cocktail) and Backdraft (drink) deserve pages. We have different ideas on strategy and tactics, but I respect and appreciate your work to improve the cocktail articles. Thanks, and good luck. Quale 08:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for writing and sharing your opinions. I definitely see that we have much more in common than I feared. It's mostly a matter of procedure and protocol. You seem to see rules are more rigid, and I as more flexible. That is partly because I know my own abilities, and I know that if certain rules (like AfD and Prod) are bent just enough (or better yet, the rules are not even used as obstacles in the first place) to allow me to complete the work, the entire Wikipedia will be better for it. I see the end result very clearly, and impediments to that result are very frustrating. You probably see a long history of well intentioned individuals with lofty goals that never quite materialize. And there is always the chance that I could turn out to be one of those, too. I think we both would agree that would be sad, but I do have to consider life outside the Wiki as being somewhat more important; otherwise, I couldn't even be involved in the Wiki in the first place.

As to those specific articles (Hulk and Backdraft), I have archived the data, so deletions will not be the kiss of death for my work anymore. It will still be an irritation and impediment, but I have developed work-arounds to dull the pain. This allows me to keep working without offending the delicate sensibilities of other Wikipedians in the process. ;-)

One thing you could do that would really help me. If you do not see a comment from me on a cocktail related AfD or prod, drop me a note. That way I can have a heads-up to grab anything useful, and, if it seems necessary, voice an opinion. If you will do that for me, I will back off on my protests unless I have evaluated the article an truly feel it is worthy of saving instead of fighting diligently for every article that comes up. Fair enough?

Again, thank you for taking the time to write. I really appreciate it. Even though we do not agree completely, I have great respect for you. Take care. --Willscrlt 09:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

January 2007

Cocktails expansion templates/categories

Hi - please see my comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Category:Cocktails (expand) for the way other WikiProjects mark their articles for expansion. It a standardise=d system that makes far more sense than treading on the toes of other WikiProjects like WP:WSS. Grutness...wha? 00:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cocktails templates reply

I've replied on my talk page, per your request. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 02:51, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cocktails invitation reply

I Would be happy to help with the Cocktails project. You have my support and assistance. Churba 20:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a subject I'm interested in, please let me know if there's anything specific I can do to help. Roy Harmon 01:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cocktails renaming

Feel free to rename now. If almost all the members have already approved, there's no reason to make it go on any longer. Such deadlines are generally fairly arbitrary anyway, so further changes are no big deal. Badbilltucker 14:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Beer mixes

Hi Willscrit. I have left a message on the talk page of the Beer mixes category. There is already a category for beer cocktails. Also, the term beer mix is used in the brewing industry. Regards. SilkTork 02:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mixed drinks

That's an interesting and useful category. You could use that as a sub of Cocktails - as cocktails could be mixed food (such as fruit cocktail) or mixed drugs as well as mixed drink. Good work. SilkTork 02:39, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beer mix

I see your intention, though I think the name of the article should change. A google search only reveals the brewing term, or reflections from Wikipedia. Mixed drink already redirects to Cocktail. Perhaps Beer cocktail? SilkTork 02:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beer cocktails

Yes. I prefer beer cocktails to beer mixes. And I am as guilty as anyone in using the term beer mix at some point in discussion on the cocktail project. But as it just seems to be a Wikipedia editor term, it's not one we really should be using. It may be an idea to change the current article titles which say (beer mix) in brackets to something that is used outside of Wiki. If beer cocktail is that expression, and you have googled it, then that sounds good to me. SilkTork 09:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good. Yes, I did google it and found several sites (one example) that refer to these as such. I plan to rename the "beer mix" disambiguations to "beer cocktail" once everything is moved back around. I was going to use AWB to do the recategorizing, but decided to do it manually and add the infoboxes at the same time. Though really, I should be in bed.

One note on the infobox. I see you changed type to "Cocktails with beer", but type should just be set to "beer" (well, originally it was "beermix", but I changed it to just "beer" now). That automatically generates the appropriate category. If you would like to finish up so I can go to bed, that would be great. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 10:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've just looked at what you have done regarding the new category. I'm happy. Yes - I agree that "beer cocktail" is better. I'm not going to be on much today as I have a number of things to do, including making some stout, but I'll take a look at the info box, and at renaming the articles with (beer mix) in the title to (beer cocktail). I'm not certain that having the category beer in the info box will work. The beer cocktails are just a little outside the scope of the main beer project, although they would come under beer culture, a subset of beer. SilkTork 10:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I think I was unclear. I was speaking of the {{WPMIXInfobox}} Specifically look at the section on alcohol types. All you have to do is set that to "beer", and the drink will be added automagically to the Category:Beer cocktails category. I agree with you that these are technically outside of the WikiProject Beer scope (read the note under "outcome" for more on sharing scopes). The thing that worries me now, is that I think there is likely only going to be 1 or maybe 2 Category:Cocktails with beer left in the category, which makes that not worth having a category at all. What are your thoughts? Probably should move this to WP:MIX for some involvement from more people. If you don't have a firm suggestion, then let's move the talk there. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 10:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

February 2007

backdraft

Hi. I hope you can read this. It's the closest thing I seem to have found on wikipedia to replying to your message. Yes I am the one who commented on Backdraft. I'd be happy to help you improve the article. I've spoken to a friend of mine, who also thanks you for it by the way, but he also does not remembers the ice (and we also don't know the ingredients used). We've tried to remember how it's prepared (we're usually a little dizzy by the time we order it ... and very dizzy by the time we leave :) ). Besides cinnamon, we've also remembered there is no ice involved, and the waitresses usually use a paper napkin to hold the alcohol vapors in the glass. After quickly drinking the shot glass with a straw, she punches the napkin with it and tells us to inhale from it. It really burns your neck, but I've never seen anyone vomit from it (this is regarding step 15). About the physics, I have to tell you that I have no idea. Regarding the intro however, I have to tell you this has an immediate effect on me (and seems to have the same effect on everyone who's enjoyed it with me).

I hope this helps you. If not please tell me how I can help you. I've been searching for how to make this drink for a long time and found it just now by accident. It would be a shame for this article to be deleted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.181.0.35 (talk) 23:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for the Tequila Sunrise cocktail update

I just wanted to thank you for updating the units, and yes, SI-units and metric units are synonymous. I looked at the votings, but they were closed already. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.142.47.76 (talk) 22:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Hi. I'm just curious what your thoughts are on the subject even if the voting has ended. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 22:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Soft Drinks

January 2007

Coca-Cola peer review request

Hello Willscrlt, you have indicated that you are a member of the Soft Drinks WikiProject. Can you please peer review Coca-Cola here. Thank you in advance.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 13:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

February 2007

Cocktails

Hi Willscrlt. Thanks for telling me what I'm doing wrong so I can correct it. I'll look over the Box format again. I was mostly just copying from other ones, so I didn't read the spec.

Your comment: The biggest concern is that I'm not sure where you are obtaining your recipe information from for the IBA Official Cocktails. For all such drinks, you should only use the official recipes and preparation instructions found at the IBA website. Generally, the only tweaking we do to them is to add bullets to the list of ingredients, Wikify the ingredients and any bar tools or procedures mentioned in the instructions.

Why was the IBA chosen as the "official" source of cocktails? This is an industry sponsored group of major spirits producers. There's nothing inherently wrong with this. But, the recipes presented here may not the traditional recipe or the "proper" one. I would like to see IBA designation given less importance-- taken out of the header and moved to a new section called "designations" or some such.

This brings up another issue, which is that cocktails generally have an original recipe, a traditional recipe, and a contemporary recipe. If there can only be a single recipe in the box, which one should it be? For instance, I've seen recipes calling for a prosecco to puree ratio of 5:1, 3.5:2, 3:1, and 2:1, all of which come from reputable sources.

I was looking at recipes on Haigh's CocktailDB, Drinkboy (aka Robert Hess), in Haigh's book, and in DeGroff.

I'll look for the template thing.

Philvarner 18:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more option: the box could just list the ingredients instead of giving proportions. Since the Wikipedia entry isn't supposted to be a recipe book (as per the references to the BartendingWiki [or whatever it's called]), it seems that this would be appropriate. Also, the IBA recipes are available on the IBA website, so this information is both duplicate and close to copyright violation.

Philvarner 18:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I responded on your talk page. --Willscrlt (Talk) 01:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've done a fantastic job on the cocktail pages. I actually remember looking a few months ago and couldn't find much good information, so I was actually surprised when I revisted last weekend. The increase in quality was part of the reason that I decided to start contributing.

Willscrlt: I chose the IBA as the "official" source, simply so that there would be one internationally agreed upon standard that could be used as a reference point

I actually don't think we should have an "official" source. What I was actually arguing for was that the "ingredients" only list the ingredients with no proportions. Otherwise, you'll continually have people, like me, who see the proportions, think they're wrong (in their or others opinion) and try to change them. The reader can get the recipe other places, e.g., CocktailDB.com, Drinkboy, or the IBA. I don't like the IBA recipes on principle because they weren't democratically decided, they were declared by and industry group (I'm not against industry groups per se, just that they have different interests in mind than cocktail enthusiasts and cocktail historians). You said, "After discovering the IBA's list, the decision was easy: use the one recipe that (I presume) has already been debated on internationally by people much more familiar with the topic than I am (or likely most other Wikipedians are).", and I don't think this true. The recipes were decided by the IBA, not debated, and are not necessarily historically accurate. The other issue is that if the IBA is the standard, non-IBA cocktails will either have no recipe or will have an arbitrary recipe. That's why I don't think any exact recipes should be in the box. I do think each drink should have a link to it's entry in CocktailDB and IBA recipe. I looked, and it is possible to link directly to the popped up window.

""Haigh's CocktailDB, Haigh's book, and DeGroff are unknown to me. If you have a link to Haigh's website, please pass it along. The books are fine if they are the only source available (unlikely), or to be used as secondary sources. They make poor primary sources only because someone has to have a copy of the books on-hand to verify the information. You could state that a Whiskey Sour is made primarily with Pisco according to page 131 of the 1988 edition of DeGroff, but unless there is another editor with a copy of that version of the book (which could even be a made-up edition, as it is in my case), there is no way to verify the (patently false) information I just claimed. Such assertions are used by unscrupulous editors to circumvent WP:RS and WP:VERIFY to forward their own agenda. A freely accessible website makes a good choice, because anyone can go there with a mouse click and verify the information very quickly.""

Ted Haigh goes by Dr. Cocktail and is a highly-respected cocktail author and speaker. His site is CocktailDB.com, which has a large list of "classic" cocktails and their variations. His book is "Vintage Spirits and Forgotten Cocktails". Dale DeGroff wrote "The Craft of the Cocktail", a well-respected and widely available book.

I agree that obscure references can be bad, but I think they're better than the mostly wrong information that's widely available on the web about cocktails.

"" Based on the feedback we have received from visitors, many people come to Wikipedia's mixed drinks section solely to find and experiment with new drink recipes or variations on old favorites. To leave out the measurements entirely would be a disservice to those visitors."

I think giving them only one option is an even greater disservice. I think "new drink recipes or variations" is clearly in the recipe category. I think we should have several links to recipes at the bottom of each entry, but no precise recipe listed in the entry. Again, I think fewer people would try to change the ingredients or add measurements if none of them had measurements and there were many recipe links at the bottom.

One thing I think is important is to offer the history of various drinks. If a drink doesn't have a history, e.g., the Backdraft, I think it should be moved to a single page of "curious drinks" or something like that. I would be quite liberal with moving short cocktail articles into collection pages (if that's something that's appropriate for Wikipedia).

Oh, and just a bit on my background. I'm also a tech person rather than a professional drink-person. I've been into them for the last few months and have been reading quite a bit. I have a food blog and may be able to get some other more knowledgeable cocktail bloggers to contribute.

Thanks!

Philvarner 03:28, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, one more thing: why is the Bellini a cocktail and not a wine mix?

Philvarner 03:48, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, from a bartender I know:

The IBA is very popular in Europe. It's not very popular in North America though. They do a good job of maintain standard drinks in the EU, which is kind of good. If you order a drink in Italy from an IBA bartender, and then travel to France you'd almost get the same drink, unlike North America. But, I'm not sure their drinks follow the historical recipes or whether they are abbreviated versions.

Philvarner 05:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, I created the Wine cocktail page, but then realized there's not much to put on it. Since it just an obvious description and a list, I'd actually be in favor of leaving it in the List of Cocktails page. Perhaps getting rid of the beer cocktail page would also be good, since it seems to duplicate the list in the LoC page.

Philvarner

Ah, so I see the difference now. Nevermind.

I put the bellini and the mimosa on it, the two that came to mind. I'd say the qualification should be if the majority of the alcohol by volume from the wine is greater than the distilled spirits, then it should be moved to the Wine cocktail page.

Philvarner 05:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cocktail Wiki questions

Couple of things:

A added a page Fizz(cocktail) to replace the Gin Fizz and Ramos Gin Fizz pages. I haven't added it to the List of Cocktails yet. Please do so if you think it's adequate. Redirects from the GF and RGF pages would be good too, if you can do those.

What's with the tag: open-curly-brace open-curly-brace Alcoholic beverages close-curly-brace close-curly-brace (sorry, I don't know the proper way to escape the wiki tags yet). It's on some pages, but not others (for instance, Mai-Tai but not Martini).

The Ramos Gin Fizz has text that's the same as on Gumbo Pages (run by a respectable and knowleable cocktailian, who wouldn't have copied it from wiki). Documented it in the Discussion.

Philvarner 06:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I responded on your talk page. --Willscrlt (Talk) 06:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Followup to Cocktail questions

Thanks for the info

I'll remember the space next time.

Good. :-)

I'll keep the merge thing in mind if it's likely to be contentious.

Take a look at the history of Jigger and Double jigger for an example of how to do one if you need to.

I'll add the Sour article (with a space!)

Sorry. I beat you to it. The Fizz article pointed out to me that it is much better to take an existing article (in this case Whiskey sour) and MOVE it to the new name, rather than attempting to merge multiple separate versions together (which I'm not sure can actually be done). So that's what I did. I will clean up the double redirects that were created and categorize all those redirects, too.
- I'm glad you did!

So, in the future, I would suggest the following course of action:
1. Bring up the proposed merge/whatever on the project talk page (we really should be more inclusive).
2. Pick the one, best article to keep (or if all other things are equal, the one with the longest edit history), and that is the one that will be MOVEd to the new title location.
3. The contents of the other article(s) can be incorporated into the new article.
4. When everything has been incorporated, the old articles should be blanked and turned into redirects to the new articles. The redirects have to be handled in a certain way, however, so that the edit history is preserved.
5. On the talk page of the new article, some template (not sure at the moment which) has to be added to point people to the old edit histories if they should ever need to view them.
As you can see, edit histories are a big thing that far too few Wikipedians understand or even care about.

- Sounds good.

I'll add the Amaretto Sour to the sours page also. It's a very small amount of information to duplicate, and someone is going to add it to either place if it's not there anyway.

I'm thinking of creating a special article just for it that we transclude into both articles. That way, only one article has to be edited, and both get updated. I remember reading about that somewhere, and it is an acceptable option in a case like this. It will be fun to figure out exactly how to go about that. So for now, just use {{main|Amaretto sour}} as the only content for Amaretto sour on the Sours page. Then I can insert the transcluded portion there when it's ready.
- Done. I think it should stay on the Amaretto page, since that's what it's really associated with, more so than sours.

The classification gets a bit difficult here, since a Fizz is also a Sour. I'll experiment some, but I think the sour page will probably be something like a "common sours" section with links to the other pages (e.g., Sidecar, Margarita) and Sour-named drinks without their own page like Whiskey sour and Amaretto sour. We'll see.

Okay then. I'm glad you're figuring that out, not me. Leave me the easy things like esoteric templates, transcluding sub-pages, and properly categorizing reirects, and I will leave you the challenging part of figuring out how to classify those drinks. Hehe.
- I'll think a bit on this.

Thanks Philvarner 07:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Willscrlt (Talk) 07:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's with the end of the month

You mentioned something about needing to get a lot of things done before the end of the month. What's the deadline for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philvarner (talk • contribs) February 8, 2007

In December, when I started the cleanup project for WikiProject Cocktails, I set the end of February as a reasonable deadline to complete the process. Actually, at the time, I didn't know if it was reasonable or not, but I knew that people would need a firm deadline, and 3 months seemed as far out as people were likely to tolerate.

In December, there were several AFD nominations within the scope of our project to kill off stubs (especially the stubs that were nothing other than recipes). I established that deadline as a compromise to encourage people to stop nominating the articles I was trying to improve, without allowing such cleanup to drag on forever and never be completed. Initially, that request was ignored, but after seeing some good results, the number of AFD nominations dropped off sharply. There are still several articles that are more or less likely to be AFD'ed around March 1st, if they are not cleaned up before then (ranked in order of jeopardy):

Backdraft (drink)
{cl|WikiProject Mixed Drinks merge-delete candidates}}, which includes several of articles from our to-do list: Bull Shot, Captain Kinger, Carrot Cake (cocktail), Daisy (cocktail), Effervescent moonshine, Freddie Bartholomew (cocktail), ~~Gin Fizz~~, Jellybean (cocktail), Jäger Bomb, Lorraine (cocktail), Mock champagne, Planter's punch, Salty dog (cocktail), Satan's Whiskers
The Joe Gilmore articles in the merge section of the to-do list
Probably at a slightly lower risk are any of the stub articles at Category:Mixed drink stubs.
Any articles that are within our scope but have not been identified yet. Category:Drink stubs, Category:Beverages, and Category:Alcoholic beverages are good places to look to find such articles.

Between your, Happy-melon's, and my efforts, we stand a very good chance of getting most, if not all these up to an acceptable standard by the end of the month, which makes me very happy. I'm sure I couldn't have done nearly so much with out your help, and the help of other editors who have helped more anonymously. --Willscrlt (Talk) 22:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

my 2c:

I added a Historical section to the list of cocktails, but I think this should be split into something else. I don't know what to name it yet, so I didn't want to make the page.

on the merge delete candidates:

Daisy (cocktail) - Cleaned up and put in historical section.

Gin Fizz - done

Bull Shot, Captain Kinger, Carrot Cake (cocktail), , Effervescent moonshine, Freddie Bartholomew (cocktail), Jellybean (cocktail), Lorraine (cocktail), Mock champagne - minor drinks, these should be merged into the list.

Jäger Bomb - popularly important, but should be on a shots page

Planter's punch - important, but not much to it. I think we need a Tiki drinks page for this

Salty dog (cocktail) -- important, but not much to it. Move to the list of cocktails.

Satan's Whiskers -- I cleaned this up, but I don't think it needs to be on a separate page.

I'll get started on this.

Another idea: create a new page for "stupid drinks in which you drop a shot of something into something else" (I don't know what the real name for this type of thing is, so that's my snarky name) and merge the short-ish Irish Carbomb page and the JagerBomb page to it.

Philvarner 06:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with creating some type of an historical cocktails articles that focuses on the history of pre-, during-, and post- prohibition cocktails, perhaps with one or two illustrative cocktails in each section. I think that would be a good branch off of the main Cocktails article. I think that building "family" pages for things like Sours, Fizzes, and so forth is a good idea for dealing with broad classes of drinks (I will be updating the Infobox to handle "families" (see Sour (cocktail) for how to configure the infobox for that, even though it doesn't do anything special quite yet).
I would keep the regular link to the main article. If the main article is merged to a different page, that's okay. A redirect will work fine. It also allows someone to expand the article again at a later time without breaking links.
As we condense and merge, we need to keep in mind that in the future, people may wish to expand and split again. That's perfectly fine, and we should make it as easy as possible for them.
The List of cocktails should remain a sort of master list to help people find whatever it is, and serve as a catch-all for minor drinks that really do not fit anywhere else.
At least, that's how I see this making the most sense both now and into the future. You're free to disagree, and that's good, because I like a lot of your ideas. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk) 06:28, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another idea: create a new page for "stupid drinks in which you drop a shot of something into something else" (I don't know what the real name for this type of thing is, so that's my snarky name) and merge the short-ish Irish Carbomb page and the JagerBomb page to it.

Philvarner 06:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are all variations on a Boilermaker (beer cocktail). Carbomb could be merged into the Boilermaker article, but that would definitely need to go through a formal discussion process, because Carbomb receives a lot of interest. I doubt consensus could be reached on merging it. As to Jager Bomb, I think I already discussed merging it with the main Jaegermeister article.
In many instances, I am in favor of adding drinks like that directly to the main alcohol's page. Amaretto is one where I did a lot of that. Herbsainte was one created by someone else before me that is a similar idea.
A similar "family" is the Snakebite (beer cocktail), which is where you mix a shot (or equal parts) of something with something else. Though that is also similar to a Shandy, which is where you mix equal parts beer with lemonade or other soft drink. All variations on a theme. It's hard to know where to draw a dividing line. --Willscrlt (Talk) 06:28, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I created the page Minor_cocktails to put Satan's Whiskers, etc. I don't like the name and am trying to think of something better. I see it for drinks that don't have enough info for a single page, but more than just an ingredients list. I haven't done the redirects since I want the name to change. Philvarner 06:20, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. I don't like that either. I faced the same problem with Cocktails with less common spirits. I was originally wanting to say "minor spirits" or "other cocktails", but each would have offended someone. Pisco has few drinks associated with it, but it's a HUGE source of national pride (and edit wars) between Peru and Chile (be very careful when you edit anything to do with Pisco). Likewise, a cocktail we feel is minor (or even historical) is likely to be considered offensive to someone who loves that drink. We have to remain totally non-value-judging in our naming. --Willscrlt (Talk) 06:28, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing the Todo list?

Should I edit the todo list when something is done? Or is it more of a static thing that shows what was decided to do ? Philvarner 06:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For now, it would probably be best to <s>Strike-through</s> the text (~~Strike-through~~) to indicate it was completed. Or, if you moved something, just add a note there. Eventually we can come up with a page that lists what everyone has done, and we can move things from the current to-do to the completed list as a record of our work. But I'd rather focus on getting real work done than getting caught up in administrative tasks. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk) 23:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Snakebite reversion

Okay on the reversion. If people keep trying to add anything, then I'm definitely in favor of anything that dissuades them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Philvarner (talk • contribs) 07:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Effervescent moonshine removal

The drink Effervescent moonshine doesn't seem to exist outside of wikipedia. Googling for either it or the "Norwegian" term in the article only give hits for either wikipedia or the wikipedia copycats. I suggest complete removal, but I don't know how to initiate the process. Philvarner 08:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Try the {{prod}} template first (follow the link for options). If it is removed, then a full AFD process will need to be started. --Willscrlt (Talk) 10:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Gilmore

All of the Gilmore cocktails have been merged into Joe Gilmore. It probably needs some polishing, but I need to wait a while. All of the merge redirects have been add. ~~The main issue remaining is that the infoboxes are longer than the entries for each cocktail, and I don't know the proper line/entry break to use.~~ -- figured it out. Philvarner 22:38, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cocktails

Hi, I noticed you've been doing a bunch of work regarding List of cocktails and other articles related to cocktails. Just wanted to mention that I did a bunch of stuff regarding cocktails articles in the past. When I first discovered the cocktails articles here, I found that a large percentage of the articles consisted of nothing but recipes, which violates WP:NOT. So, I transwikied over 100 of them to wikibooks(where they eventually got moved to the huge Glossary page there), and deleted them all from here.

Well, actually, I made them all into redirects to Cocktail. They're mostly still there, if you were ever interested in seeing them, clicking on "what links here" from Cocktail and looking at most of the entries which are redirects will find them.

I actually know basically nothing about cocktails, I was just attempting to get unencylopedic content out of wikipedia. But I figured I'd mention this if you ever wanted to resurrect some of those articles and turn them into actual articles, instead of what they were which was merely recipes. --Xyzzyplugh 23:31, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Responded on your talk page. --Willscrlt (Talk) 12:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibooks, bartending, etc.

Hi Willscrlt. Yes, I'm still active on WB (I'm an admin), but really don't know enough about bartending to add to the conversation either there or here. --SB_Johnny|^talk|_books 16:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Im back

Yeah im going to have to start helping with this stuff - i feel bad for not wiki-ing thuglas^talk|edits 15:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Review of List of cocktails

Hey Will. Thanks for the advice. Don't worry, I'm not about to restructure anything major without a lot of input.

I've been going through entries on the List of cocktails. As you've probably seen, I've removed some that don't exist, and have clean up some that do. I don't know whether this should go on the "To do" list or the discussion page, so please move it to wherever it's appropriate. Comments?

A couple of general things:

(1) a page "Soft drink cocktails" to go with the Wine cocktails and Beer cocktails pages. "Soft drink" is the page that "soda" and "pop" etc. redirect to. This can hold all of the entries like Jack and Coke, 7 & 7, etc. This will help keep these from proliferating.

(2) a page "Coffee cocktails" to put all of the various American "national" coffees (Spanish, Jamaican, etc) and traditional "real" national coffees like Karsk.

Expand/edit page

Tom Collins - add history
Bronx edit
Gimlet edit
John Collins expand
Bumbo (also known as Bombo or Bumboo) expand
Moscow Mule expand page
Singapore Sling editing. The first sentence makes no sense.
Hurricane expand or merge

Expand only description

Presbyterian - includes bourbon expand desc, not page
Man O'War - includes bourbon expand description, not page

Merge

Ramos Gin Fizz merge to Fizz
Gin Sour merge to Sours
Brandy Alexander - merge into Other classic cocktails, page is mostly recipes
Lynchburg Lemonade merge
CS Cowboy merge
Mickey Slim merge
Wine cooler merge
7 & 7 merge
Jack and Coke merge
Piscola merge
Karsk merge w/ coffee based
French 75 merge, transwiki recipes
Zurracapote merge w/ sangria
Tinto de Verano merge w/ sangria
Vodka Red Bull merge into Soft drink cocktails article

Champagne Cocktail merge
Spritzer merge
Mimosa merge
Rose Kennedy Cocktail merge

El Presidente merge
Buck's Fizz merge into Fizz
Screwdriver merge
Apple Martini merge
White Lady or Delilah merge
Rusty Nail merge
Panama merge
Pink Gin merge
Stinger merge
Lime Rickey merge into Rickey article
Black Russian merge into White Russian
Feijoa Dancer merge or delete

Backdraft (also a Pepperdraft variation) merge
B & B merge
Buttery Nipple merge
Sake Bomb merge

Glogg merge (already tagged by someone else)

Delete

Salmiakki Koskenkorva - delete or merge, sounds like a hoax, and I couldn't find any reliable references to it.

Responses

Wow. A great job on this list. :-)

Soft drink cocktails. Eh. I think there has got to be a better name for that. It's bad enough we have beer cocktails (cocktails are distilled spirit based, not beer-based) and wine cocktails, but soft-drink cocktails is really stretching things. However, if you find enough evidence that the term is currently in-use elsewhere (which is the case with beer cocktails and wine cocktails), then okay. Otherwise, we should not invent a term just for the sake of article classification convenience.

Ditto with coffee cocktails.

As to these new pages, please remember to fully develop them within the Mixed Drinks WikiProject Work Area. A review by other project participants would be a good idea before moving the article into main space, just to be sure the article is fully up to Wikipedia standards and not in conflict with other participants' efforts. Plus, developing in in Project-space allows other people to chip in and help with the work.

Sorry it took me so long to respond. I have been without a working computer since the 13th. And now I will be visiting relatives (with very limited Internet access) for a few days. I will try to dial in for messages, but I won't be able to return to Wikiwork for about a week or so, I fear. :-(

--Willscrlt (Talk) 06:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page histories

The deleted subpages' edit histories are preserved here for GFDL requirements (not that it's likely to ever be important here, right?).

User talk:Willscrlt/Actions

18:59, 23 July 2008 Xenobot (talk | contribs) m (11,647 bytes) (Bot) removing Category:TALKSPACE archives|BASEPAGENAME per CFD
05:52, 11 February 2007 Willscrlt (Archiving older discussion)
01:06, 24 January 2007 Willscrlt (Moved some talk to an archive)
00:25, 24 January 2007 Willscrlt (Testing templates)

User talk:Willscrlt/Advice

19:00, 23 July 2008 Xenobot m (19,563 bytes) (Bot) removing Category:TALKSPACE archives|BASEPAGENAME per CFD
05:55, 11 February 2007 Willscrlt (Archiving older discussion)

User talk:Willscrlt/Comments

18:59, 23 July 2008 Xenobot m (10,721 bytes) (Bot) removing Category:TALKSPACE archives|BASEPAGENAME per CFD
04:29, 2 May 2008 Willscrlt (10,773 bytes) (Moved some items to archives)
10:23, 10 April 2008 タチコマ robot m (9,074 bytes) (Bot edit: Replacing image, Replaced: Barnstar-rotating.gif → Tireless_Contributor_Barnstar.gif)
05:53, 11 February 2007 Willscrlt m (Fixed typos)
05:52, 11 February 2007 Willscrlt (Archiving older discussion)
01:07, 24 January 2007 Willscrlt (Moved some talk to an archive)

User talk:Willscrlt/Edits

18:59, 23 July 2008 Xenobot m (13,807 bytes) (Bot) removing Category:TALKSPACE archives|BASEPAGENAME per CFD
05:53, 11 February 2007 Willscrlt (Archiving older discussion) (undo)
01:09, 24 January 2007 Willscrlt m (Fixed formatting of subsections) (undo)
01:07, 24 January 2007 Willscrlt (Moved some talk to an archive)

User talk:Willscrlt/Suggestions

19:00, 23 July 2008 Xenobot m (4,250 bytes) (Bot) removing Category:TALKSPACE archives|BASEPAGENAME per CFD
01:07, 24 January 2007 Willscrlt (Moved some talk to an archive)

User talk:Willscrlt/Templates

19:00, 23 July 2008 Xenobot m (7,396 bytes) (Bot) removing Category:TALKSPACE archives|BASEPAGENAME per CFD
04:29, 2 May 2008 Willscrlt (7,448 bytes) (Moved some items to archives)
05:55, 11 February 2007 Willscrlt (Archiving older discussion)
01:07, 24 January 2007 Willscrlt (Moved some talk to an archive)

User talk:Willscrlt/User adoptions

19:00, 23 July 2008 Xenobot m (6,256 bytes) (Bot) removing Category:TALKSPACE archives|BASEPAGENAME per CFD
04:31, 2 May 2008 Willscrlt (6,308 bytes) (Moved some items to archives)
05:55, 11 February 2007 Willscrlt (Archiving older discussion)

User talk:Willscrlt/WikiProjects

19:00, 23 July 2008 Xenobot m (68,989 bytes) (Bot) removing Category:TALKSPACE archives|BASEPAGENAME per CFD
04:30, 2 May 2008 Willscrlt (69,041 bytes) (Moved some items to archives)
10:53, 16 February 2008 MelonBot m (39,063 bytes) (Updating links to Peer review archives)
05:55, 11 February 2007 Willscrlt (Archiving older discussion)
01:07, 24 January 2007 Willscrlt (Moved some talk to an archive)