User talk:Ajpolino/Archives/2020
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Ajpolino. 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 the current talk page. |
Your GA nomination of Plasmodium knowlesi
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Plasmodium knowlesi you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SpicyMilkBoy -- SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 10:20, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
A cup of coffee for you!
|
Thanks for taking on the development of Plasmodium knowlesi, the organism which causes malaria. I looked a bit at the good article nomination that you made. Malaria is one of the most popular topics in Wikipedia and developing this article greatly contributes to the area of interest around it. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:45, 3 January 2020 (UTC) |
- @Blueraspberry: Thank you, that's very kind. Also thanks for the Scholia link. I wasn't aware of the project, but will keep an eye on it when I'm working on other articles. I hope all is well! Ajpolino (talk) 04:26, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
note re efforts
Hi. I appreciate all your positive efforts and input lately. I could use some input on your views at the talk page for WikiProject Council. as you know, I have made a number of edits to the page in order to get things active there again. various editors have weighed in there, and I have made sure to accept their input and to adjust my edits accordingly.
I just need some help and input there at the talk page, to make sure the whole set of edits is not totally reversed, by a single individual editor who is trying to ignore the recent edits and discussions, and to revert them. If you could please weigh in accordingly, I'd appreciate it. thanks! and if you have any ideas, concerns, questions, comments, etc. please feel free to let me know by replying and pinging me here. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 04:30, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Council page
You have changed the lead of the project to omit all the main links to the projects main sub pages... like our guidelines our FAQ page. Agreed no need for 2 navboxes. This point was brought up a few times on the talk page and if FAQ was read originally all this may not have happend.--Moxy 🍁 23:39, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Moxy:, the current version is the one that stood from Dec 13th until the current mess started Jan 13th. I'm certainly no neutral party here as I was the one who moved those links in December after a discussion with MarioGom in October at the talk page about updating the WikiProject documentation. I then updated Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide, Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/WikiProject and Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals to remove redundancies and so that the recommendations would match current practices. To get an idea of what projects are out there, I also went through Bamyers99's WikiProject list user-ifying single-user WikiProject drafts that never got started, and bringing a few single-edit projects made by now-indeffed users to MfD (e.g.). Most recently, I went through Wikipedia:WikiProject Council (as you point out), removed links to defunct tools, and tried to make the wording more clear and concise. The links to the main subpages are immediately below the lead. The 2013 Signpost article FAQ is under "More on WikiProjects". If you have an issue with that wording/layout, I'm happy to discuss it on the talk page. I hope that at least clarifies the rationale, even if you still disagree. I hope all is well. Happy editing. Ajpolino (talk) 00:22, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Plasmodium knowlesi
The article Plasmodium knowlesi you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Plasmodium knowlesi for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SpicyMilkBoy -- SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 03:02, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- @SpicyMilkBoy: Thank you for the thorough review! The article is definitely much better for it. If you've got the time and interest, Wikipedia:Good_article_nominations#Biology_and_medicine is very backlogged and could use many more willing hands/eyes. Thanks again and happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 04:37, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- No problem, I enjoyed reviewing it. Sorry again for all my nitpicking :p I'm currently working on getting Complete blood count up to GA, which is a huge task, so I'm not sure I can take on another GA review right now. But I'll definitely try to work on the backlog when I have the time for it. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 06:04, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
note re your ideas
Hi there!! thanks for all your recent comments recently. I note that you are at active at Wikipedia: WikiProject Microbiology. As you know I am active at Wikipedia:WikiProject History. Would you like to work together? Iam interested in forming a loose, informal collection of editors, who can discuss what is going on at various WikIProjects, and providing ideas and input on some of the best ways to get WikiProejcts moved ahead. Any ideas that we formulate can be document at a later date at WikiProject Council if we wish, or alternately we can do so informally, on various talk pages.
Would you be interested in that, as a topic? can you let me know just a little bit about how the WikiProject Microbiology currently runs? I really appreciate it. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 16:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Sm8900:, very sadly WikiProject Microbiology doesn't currently "run" in any sense of the word. There just aren't currently enough editors interested in Microbiology to band together and organize our efforts. For the last several years whenever I've seen someone new editing the microbiology articles, I've invited them to stick around and coordinate efforts, but I've not had much luck so far. Over that time (~4.5 years), I've kept the page marked "active" with the hope that it'll entice some new people there (which I know isn't the point of the status tag, but hey, an editor can dream...), but so far no dice. Currently, WP:MICRO operates more as a noticeboard, where editors post links to discussions elsewhere that might be of interest to the handful of us who watch that project page. Until we get more microbiology-interested editors around here, I'm afraid it'll likely remain that way. So, probably not the WikiProject model you're looking for. History seems a much broader-interest topic, so I hope you find better luck there. I've not had the time to keep up with your organizing efforts, but I hope things are going well. All the best, Ajpolino (talk) 19:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- okay, based upon your reply above, I will revamp and restructure the page in the near future, and establish you as a project coordinator. ....errr, if that's okay?
my new approach to WikiProjects is to highlight the people in the community who are active participants there. if you are one of them, then that's all we need to make you an active coordinator, and perhaps thereby inch a little closer to getting the WikiProject to be a little more active. how does that sounds? --Sm8900 (talk) 19:45, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you, but no thank you. I'd prefer to leave the page as it is for now, if that's alright. I don't have the time to coordinate much of anything right now. Several others do watch that page, so if you're looking for a pool of willing coordinators from various project areas, perhaps you could post on the WP:MICRO talk page asking if anyone would be willing to step forward as coordinator and be more involved in cross-project coordination/discussion? Worse case scenario no one responds and you're no worse off than you were before *insert shruggy shoulder emoji*. Ajpolino (talk) 20:04, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- hm, okay. that sounds excellent. no problem, that approach is perfectly fine as well. I appreciate your input and your insights. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 20:12, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you, but no thank you. I'd prefer to leave the page as it is for now, if that's alright. I don't have the time to coordinate much of anything right now. Several others do watch that page, so if you're looking for a pool of willing coordinators from various project areas, perhaps you could post on the WP:MICRO talk page asking if anyone would be willing to step forward as coordinator and be more involved in cross-project coordination/discussion? Worse case scenario no one responds and you're no worse off than you were before *insert shruggy shoulder emoji*. Ajpolino (talk) 20:04, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- okay, based upon your reply above, I will revamp and restructure the page in the near future, and establish you as a project coordinator. ....errr, if that's okay?
Draft of ideas for project page
Hi. you had asked me to prepare a proposal to present to others at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council, to explain the changes that i wish to make, and to get their feedback and input, on what they think of the ideas.
I have prepared a brief, concise draft below.by the way, I have made a sub-section break for this draft, just to make it easier to edit; obviously, if you wish to remove the section break, that is totally up to you.
could you please let me know what you think? thanks!!
draft of ideas to suggest at WikiProject Council, for changes to the page
|
|---|
|
ok. what do you think? I have deliberately kept this very concise. I can add to it if you wish.
Also, for discussion of this proposal, there are various options as to where to discuss this. if you wish, I could set up a shared talk page in my own user space. or I could make it a sub-page of the WikiProject Council; however, before I would add any pages there, I would need at least some other editors who wish me to do so. Any options for this is fine with me.
Could you please let me know what you think of the ideas above? does this accord with what you wish me to present there? you had indicated a while back that you had some agreement with some ideas. I am willing to adjust or revise these in any way that you might wish. feel free to let me know which parts need changes, or need expansion, or need condensing; whatever you prefer is totally fine. I appreciate your help. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 18:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Sm8900: That proposal looks clear and concise to me. I'd advise posting it on the talk page of the WikiProject Council for discussion. I know that was the location of the last mess, but I think posting this clear set of suggestions will prompt more productive discussion. Thanks for slowing things down for us! Ajpolino (talk) 21:52, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
- thanks!! I appreciate your helpful reply. that is very helpful to know. I am going to let some time go by, just to collect input from others. I appreciate your helpful input. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 05:16, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
question re item
Hi. I have a basic question on an earlier item above on your talk page. where is that welcome template above from? do you know? it looks very nice. I'd like to use it. do you know the name for that template? I'd look in the category for that, but sometimes I don't seem to find items like this so easily. I can look for this myself, if you don't know the name for that template. thanks!!! --Sm8900 (talk) 17:41, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, @Peaceray: left it on my userpage several years ago, so I'm not entirely sure. But I think maybe it's Template:WelcomeMenu? Thankfully, he's still around, so if he recalls maybe he'll post here. Cheers! Ajpolino (talk) 19:19, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- That would be the {{WelcomeMenu}} template. The syntax for using it is {{subst:WelcomeMenu}}. Peaceray (talk) 20:02, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- hey, that's good to know, Peaceray. I appreciate your help. thank you also, Ajpolino. I will look that up. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 20:13, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- That would be the {{WelcomeMenu}} template. The syntax for using it is {{subst:WelcomeMenu}}. Peaceray (talk) 20:02, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
Idea for new community workspace
Hi. I would like to create some kind of collaborative workspace where coordinators or members of various WikiProjects would gather and provide updates and information on what is going on at each wikiproject, i.e. regarding their latest efforts, projects, and where interested editors can get involved.
You had expressed some interest in this idea, so I wanted to get your brief input on whether you'd be interested in helping me to make this happen. I see a few possible options for making this happen, so I would like to get your input and feedback on this. which of the options below would you prefer? also, please reply to the brief questions below.
- Would you be interested in an idea of this nature?
- If so, which option below seems most feasible to you?
- Create a new page/talk page at the existing WikiProject Council, where members of various WikiProject can gather to offer updates, information and ideas on the latest efforts at each of their own WikiProject, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Town Hall.
- Create an entirely new WikiProject with an inclusive name such as
- Create a new collaborative page or forum, but notas a new WIkiProject, i.e. with some name like
- Create a new sub-page in my own userspace, such as User:Sm8900/Town Hall
- Create a subpage at an umbrella-type WikiProject that already covers a broad topical area, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject History/Town Hall
Please feel free to let me know what you think of this idea, and please let me know your preference, regarding the options above. if you do not see any need for this idea, that is totally fine. However, I think that the majority of editors lack awareness of where the truly active editing is taking place and at which WikiProjects, and I would like to do whatever I can to help make people more aware of where the activity is, what they can do to help, and also which areas of Wikipedia offer ideas and efforts that might help them in their own editing activities. Please feel free to let me know. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 05:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Request for review
Hi Ajpolino! I would like to request you for reviewing my draft page Epos 257 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Epos_257). I know that it was already reviewed and unfortunately declined, nevertheless I have rewritten it and I would like to ask you very much to check the article if at least a little possible...Thank you very much! Regards Jiří Jiří Gruber (talk) 12:52, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
FAR notifications
If you keep this template somewhere in your user space, you'll know which FAs are potentially coming up for WP:Featured article review; there are a few there that might interest you, but Huntington's is up next at FAR, because it's currently on hold. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:03, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Hey, how are things? Sorry to bug you, but do you know anything about whether or not Soluble NSF attachment protein is a plausible standalone topic, or should it be merged somewhere? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Premeditated Chaos: Long time no see! They've certainly been the topic of a lot of study; I'd be surprised if we can't craft something decent. Give me a few days to find a minute to look around. If there's not much out there we can redirect the one-sentence article to their more-famous binding partners SNARE (protein). I hope all is well! Ajpolino (talk) 22:46, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for having a look :) I'm doing well, thanks for asking. Hope you are too! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:48, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
- Just checking in now that "a few days" has become a month. This is still on my todo list! Haven't forgotten yet. Will get to it soonish... Ajpolino (talk) 23:39, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
- Hah I kind of forgot about this till I came here to ask you about another science thing - Tandem chimerism. Could you pop that on your to-look-at list as well? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:19, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- {{subst:gentle_nudge}} Did you ever get a chance to look at these? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:13, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hmmmm ok I've beefed up Soluble NSF attachment protein a bit and WLed it from SNARE (protein). I tried to clarify what SNAPs do, but I'm not sure I've made it much clearer to the uninitiated. I also realized the three SNAP genes have pages: NAPA (gene), NAPB, and NAPG. Though, with some sadness I'll note that they're all of the templated gene page variety (which, in my humble opinion, generates a useless gamish of data that most readers will glean nothing from). I'd like to merge them all to Soluble NSF attachment protein, and may just work up the motivation to do so. Currently eyeing Tandem chimerism with a skeptical eye. Never heard of it. Trying to decide if it's a neologism or just a niche topic. Ajpolino (talk) 15:37, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- {{subst:gentle_nudge}} Did you ever get a chance to look at these? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:13, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hah I kind of forgot about this till I came here to ask you about another science thing - Tandem chimerism. Could you pop that on your to-look-at list as well? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:19, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- Just checking in now that "a few days" has become a month. This is still on my todo list! Haven't forgotten yet. Will get to it soonish... Ajpolino (talk) 23:39, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for having a look :) I'm doing well, thanks for asking. Hope you are too! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:48, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Alright, Tandem chimerism was a real thing after all, just not typically known by that name. I moved the page, started to clean it up, then realized Chimeric RNA exists, so I redirected it there instead. Look at that! Orphans dealt with. That wasn't so bad after all. Ready for the next batch! Ajpolino (talk) 16:13, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ahh, you're the best, thank you! I'll let you know if I run into anything else :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:46, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
If you're interested
I just started a draft on colonial morphology and I thought it's something you might be interested in contributing to — no pressure of course, I know these are busy times :) SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 22:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note! I may not make it there in any reasonable amount of time, but if you find any interesting microbiological problems, drop me a line! Time has been a bit tight recently, but I've long wished to improve the articles on the WHO Neglected Tropical Diseases, so perhaps our work on Chagas will finally give me the push I needed to start. When you run out of clinical lab articles to improve, I'm sure the NTD articles will still need work :) Hope all is well! Ajpolino (talk) 19:05, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Chagas disease Featured article save
|
The Article Rescue Barnstar | |
For you and SpicyMilkBoy, what a fine and persistent effort you both put in to restoring Featured article status to Chagas disease during Wikipedia:Featured article review/Chagas disease/archive1. Very nice work indeed; wear the  on your user page, because the save belongs to you! Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
|
- Thank you SandyGeorgia. It wouldn't have happened without you pushing us in the right direction. Ajpolino (talk) 23:39, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
- Congratulations, and thank you for your work on that article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:47, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
Thank you
Dear Ajpolino, Thank you for your comments on my proposal at Wikipedia: WikiProject Council. If there is a long-standing tradition that news of WikiProjects only go on talk pages, I am prepared to accept this. Many thanks, Vorbee (talk) 17:31, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice
Hi Ajpolino/Archives, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.
Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.
To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!
Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)
Niacin GA review
I finished the reviewer's first set of requests for Pantothenic acid, so should be able to address your comments on Niacin in a timely fashion. David notMD (talk) 23:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- I have addressed all points raised in the first phase of the GA review. Thank you for you patience. David notMD (talk) 17:49, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
- Started to work through the second set. David notMD (talk) 16:23, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Med newsletter
very nice work on the newsletter, Congrats!--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Weirdness
How weird is this ... this post pinged me ????
The newsletter is awesome ... kudos on you! Taking on that kind of leadership, helping to re-invigorate WPMED, is just what the Dr. ordered. I hope to have time to look at User: Tom (LT)’s prostate article. I do not engage GA, but I can help tune it up if I find time, so was glad to see the newsletter reminder. Prostate-related article problems were a part of my hiatus from WPMED for several years, and I know more about prostates than a woman should.
Wondering if you saw the conversation at Spicy’s talk suggesting you for RFA? Barkeep49 provided some helpful feedback there. I do hope you will be thinking the direction of RFA and preparing yourself! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:40, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Back to the weirdness. I was not mentioned or linked in the second newsletter, so I do not know how that post pinged me. And I only got that one ping. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ahhh yes at RexxS's talk page I had too many tabs open and accidentally transcluded the previous month's newsletter here. That must've pinged you and a dozen others. A few seconds later I noticed my mistake and fixed it transcluding the correct newsletter, and leaving a confusing path in my wake. I have yet to exhaust the world of interesting and unusual mistakes to make. Perhaps there will be even more interesting mistakes in the future. I'm glad you got just one ping instead of a half-dozen. Sorry for the confusion! Ajpolino (talk) 16:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Back to the weirdness. I was not mentioned or linked in the second newsletter, so I do not know how that post pinged me. And I only got that one ping. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Since I was pinged I'll just say I loved the picture and caption about new and experienced editors. Let me know if I can answer questions or if you would like me to do an RfA assessment either here or via email. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hello! I agree it's great to see a reinvigorated newspaper. Don't judge me too harshly SG! (I have to admit seeing as I often have to wait a year to get GA reviews I sometimes nominate whilst I am still editing...). @Ajpolino that newsletter is really great - I think the fact that there are some {{u}} templates means that editors are getting pinged every time the templates are substituted, it was quite a surprise to see so many pings for me this morning :). --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Agh! I didn't realize usernames linked on a transcluded page would still get pings
Facepalm. I'm very sorry for all the pings. I'll wrap the names in {{noping}}in the future, or just not sign the post when I transclude them. Live and learn. - As to RfA, Sandy, I appreciate the vote of confidence. Certainly when I started here, I thought a "successful" wiki-path would include an RfA. But as I've settled in, I very rarely bump into problems that require the admin toolkit to clean up. At a certain point, I suppose seeking sysop status lost its shiny appeal. Barkeep49 I appreciated your post at Spicy's talk page regarding the "hidden advantages" of the toolset, as well as the expanded options for useful things you can do with your time. With that in mind, I'd appreciate your assessment on whether throwing my name in the ring someday is worthwhile. If you feel an RfA is likely to be a waste of time, or that I'm ill-suited for it, I'm happy to keep plugging away at the microbiology/medicine articles with my current toolset. Posting here is fine by me, but if you feel you can be more forthright by email, feel free to email me as well. Thanks in advance for your time (and most importantly, sorry again for all the newsletter pings)! Ajpolino (talk) 04:00, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ajpolino, I will gladly let you know what I find. But, as someone who edits a newsletter, I suggest you sign your newsletters as it helps with archiving (I tend to go with ~~~~~ so it's just date/time rather than my name). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:09, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Barkeep49, things to know as you are looking. Spicy and Ajpolino technically have an FA, as they rescued and completely rewrote Chagas disease when it was at WP:FAR. It was a goner without them. While most of WPMED was in turmoil, those two put their heads down and got to work, staying above the fracas. This newsletter exemplifies Ajpolino’s humble and hard-working character. Just quietly gets the job done. Somewhere we had a copyright issue, and Ajpolino’s research and knowledge was impressive. Maybe he can remember where that was — It was not Chagas ... may need to check our intersecting contribs. Ajpolino would be an excellent admin because, like you, he would not act on anything until he knew it well. What boxes he doesn’t check for RFA, he will learn, or he won’t use the tools in those areas ... that is ... good judgment. I believe character is more important than clicking all the boxes, and I never had an RFA nominee fail ... Ajpolino would be an asset even if he doesn’t yet check all the boxes, because he has integrity and the right temperament. Sorry for ipad typos ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:21, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Dibs on being first support vote at your RfA! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:16, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thief (it was my idea :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- PMC when you're nominating it is indeed very easy to be the first supporter. Ajpolino, I have every reason to think you would be an excellent addition to the pool of administrators. You have a good understanding of content and a great way with people. The positive feelings that people like Sandy and PMC have for you is a testament to that. However, I don't see any work in administrative areas. You just kind of go about your business building an encyclopedia. Which is great. But also makes it hard to build a case that you "need" the toolset. If you decide that you want to pursue RfA you could give some thought to how you'd answer Q1 and a few months of time of time doing some work in that area and I think you pass. But you could also just go about continuing to build an encyclopedia. If you were to run I would support you. And that's coming from someone who didn't really know your name until the last few days - exactly the kind of editor you need to gain at RfA. But the core of supports needs to be people who are truly excited to support you. I think right now you'd be looking at an expected outcome of 65 - 75 percent. That's a pretty painful RfA even if it does result in a pass (possibly after a crat chat). With a few months in an admin adjacent area (whether deletion, counter vandalism, or something else) I see your expected outcome rising dramatically - 80%+ (with the possibility of 95%+ aka an easy RfA). Is that worth it to you? I don't know. But, selfishly, I hope it is because like I said we can never have too many good editors as administrators.Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:09, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Barkeep49 & SandyGeorgia, I wasn't calling dibs on co-nom, don't wanna step on any feet :) Just joining in the pro-RFA party! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Premeditated Chaos, oh I know you weren't calling dibs. No what was happening here was me drafting you to do it (assuming Ajpolino wants to). You and Sandy have a deeper connection and deeper connections make for better noms. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:17, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ahh, I'm being voluntold, I see :P Well, I'm certainly willing! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with Barkeep's analysis, because (I believe, unfortunately) we are well past the days when trust, character, temperament, integrity and content creation were the standards by which candidates were judged, and an SG nomination was a guaranteed pass. (Is there some tool that will let me remember who my noms were? Not angling for a co-nom here, as that selection is up to Ajpolino, and we know I've built up a list of enemies, even in medical editing.) But we have the most important elements here, and yet, to get over the current threshhold at RFA, Ajpolino and Spicy would need to do some of the work in admin areas, and that's what I meant when I said they should be thinking about RFA. Barkeep, what areas do you think are good places they can pitch in? And Ajpolino, what areas most interest you and play to your strengths? Copyvio ?? In today's RFA climate, you are asked all sorts of entirely irrelevant "gotcha" questions, which in the past could be answered with "I don't know, I don't care, because I don't intend to use the tools in that area"-- no longer. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:30, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Having looked at some old RfAs I think the gotcha questions were always there. I've found a question or two I was glad I wasn't asked when rereading an old RfA recently. But RfA is also open book (and the candidate can always consult with noms (aka experienced editors) just as any good administrator does when confronting a situation where they don't have the expertise needed). Now the volume of questions has risen with the volume of participation so there might be more gotchas then before. I actually think a candidate could decline to answer some questions in areas they truly won't work. But that's a gut feeling and not based on evidence. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:52, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with Barkeep's analysis, because (I believe, unfortunately) we are well past the days when trust, character, temperament, integrity and content creation were the standards by which candidates were judged, and an SG nomination was a guaranteed pass. (Is there some tool that will let me remember who my noms were? Not angling for a co-nom here, as that selection is up to Ajpolino, and we know I've built up a list of enemies, even in medical editing.) But we have the most important elements here, and yet, to get over the current threshhold at RFA, Ajpolino and Spicy would need to do some of the work in admin areas, and that's what I meant when I said they should be thinking about RFA. Barkeep, what areas do you think are good places they can pitch in? And Ajpolino, what areas most interest you and play to your strengths? Copyvio ?? In today's RFA climate, you are asked all sorts of entirely irrelevant "gotcha" questions, which in the past could be answered with "I don't know, I don't care, because I don't intend to use the tools in that area"-- no longer. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:30, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ahh, I'm being voluntold, I see :P Well, I'm certainly willing! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Premeditated Chaos, oh I know you weren't calling dibs. No what was happening here was me drafting you to do it (assuming Ajpolino wants to). You and Sandy have a deeper connection and deeper connections make for better noms. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:17, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Barkeep49 & SandyGeorgia, I wasn't calling dibs on co-nom, don't wanna step on any feet :) Just joining in the pro-RFA party! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Dibs on being first support vote at your RfA! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:16, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Barkeep49, things to know as you are looking. Spicy and Ajpolino technically have an FA, as they rescued and completely rewrote Chagas disease when it was at WP:FAR. It was a goner without them. While most of WPMED was in turmoil, those two put their heads down and got to work, staying above the fracas. This newsletter exemplifies Ajpolino’s humble and hard-working character. Just quietly gets the job done. Somewhere we had a copyright issue, and Ajpolino’s research and knowledge was impressive. Maybe he can remember where that was — It was not Chagas ... may need to check our intersecting contribs. Ajpolino would be an excellent admin because, like you, he would not act on anything until he knew it well. What boxes he doesn’t check for RFA, he will learn, or he won’t use the tools in those areas ... that is ... good judgment. I believe character is more important than clicking all the boxes, and I never had an RFA nominee fail ... Ajpolino would be an asset even if he doesn’t yet check all the boxes, because he has integrity and the right temperament. Sorry for ipad typos ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:21, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ajpolino, I will gladly let you know what I find. But, as someone who edits a newsletter, I suggest you sign your newsletters as it helps with archiving (I tend to go with ~~~~~ so it's just date/time rather than my name). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:09, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Agh! I didn't realize usernames linked on a transcluded page would still get pings
- Hello! I agree it's great to see a reinvigorated newspaper. Don't judge me too harshly SG! (I have to admit seeing as I often have to wait a year to get GA reviews I sometimes nominate whilst I am still editing...). @Ajpolino that newsletter is really great - I think the fact that there are some {{u}} templates means that editors are getting pinged every time the templates are substituted, it was quite a surprise to see so many pings for me this morning :). --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you all for your thoughts and kind words. Barkeep49 to your question, I'm not sure if it's worth it to me. Certainly in my time here I've seen most folks use RfA Q1 to communicate some immediate need for the toolset. I'm happy to help out wherever more eye/hands are needed, but there's some limit to how many hours I'm interested in dedicating to building a storyline for why I need the tools. If there are particular things I should try my hand at, I'm happy to take a look. Pardon my ignorance, but besides notability/deletion, hunting-for-vandalism, and feeding-content-to-the-mainpage, I'm not sure what all constitutes "administrative areas". Ajpolino (talk) 17:24, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- There are the three core tools in the sysop toolset: protect/unprotect, delete/undelete, and block/unblock. So the easiest answer is that you want to use of those pairs to do some formal Wikipedia process. Now there are many flavors of each of these. A person could say they need the tools because they want to close AfDs, patrol CSDs, or do COPYVIO work and each of these are really just three flavors of delete/undelete. If there is some process you're a part of where at some point a sysop has to step in to do the process, because of the toolset, that's the sort of need that makes for an easy RfA case. If you aren't a part of any of those processes the two options are, to just keep doing what you're doing and not run for RfA or to pick-up one of those processes that interests you. What that might be for you I can't say. For me it was NPP related tasks at RfA though my most frequent use of the toolset has turned out to be AfD closing. In looking through your Wikipedia space there's nothing that jumps out as "ah this could be the area for Ajpolino" to me. Perhaps Sandy or PMC will have a suggestion that might pique your curiosity, knowing you better. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:45, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- well, yes ... but it will have to wait until I can type with a real keyboard. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:48, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Wow, I can hardly believe two weeks have already passed. Apologies for the slow response. Thank you Barkeep49 for taking the time to share your thoughts. I'll keep that in mind and perhaps do some sniffing around administrative areas over the next several months. In the meantime, I hope you (all three of you) are staying well. Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 03:18, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- well, yes ... but it will have to wait until I can type with a real keyboard. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:48, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
So, I keep meaning to come back to this, and now that I see Barkeep49 has some September thing in the works, I want to finish this up. Things to think about as to "why do you need the tools" ...
- We are seriously short of admins in medical content. I think I can state that the entire community probably recognizes that, without going in to [that other] controversy. We can't keep pinging RexxS for everything adminly.
- "Typical" editors (whatever that means) do not have full journal access, and have a hard time tracking down copyvio, and then have to get in line to try to get it dealt with. You are on the job. Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2020 August 9 and we need you to handle the revdels.
- I raised a problem elsewhere about medical article protection; it is my opinion that many medical articles were semi-protected unnecessarily, for unjustified reasons. Someone needs to do an analysis and do the work of getting that situation normalized. I raised multiple examples-- all of which were then unprotected-- and not one of those articles has had a problem, indicating that the semi-protection was indeed not needed. This is something you can take on as an admin.
So, I hope you can see that you don't need to want to block people to indicate that there is a need for the tools. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:42, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Spicy: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:44, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- I think the September RfA flight will either be a neutral time to run or a better than normal time - more candidates mean attention is diffused. Ajpolino, Sandy lays out a GREAT "need for tools" case for which was the one thing that I thought hurt your chances before; with that case made I think your chances of passing rise dramatically. Sandy clearly believes in you and has a great RfA nom track record. If Premeditated Chaos joins as a co-nom you'd have a great team behind you. Spicy, I still haven't looked into you because you've seemed more hesitant but are you perhaps interested now too? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:54, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, hate to disappoint you and Sandy but I'm still not interested at this time. Maybe in a year or two... Spicy (talk) 23:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- FWIW I'm super in as a co-nom if you want me! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:04, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
- Here's a Spicy example for copyright knowledge, Talk:Treatment of Hidradenitis suppurativa, and Ajpolino is working up Buruli ulcer for FAC, while Spicy is almost there: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Complete blood count/archive1. Ajpolino also started Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Newsletter and has put out three newsletters-- pretty much the most awesome thing since sliced bread. They both have incredibly calm and collaborative temperaments, and have avoided (those other messes). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- I think the September RfA flight will either be a neutral time to run or a better than normal time - more candidates mean attention is diffused. Ajpolino, Sandy lays out a GREAT "need for tools" case for which was the one thing that I thought hurt your chances before; with that case made I think your chances of passing rise dramatically. Sandy clearly believes in you and has a great RfA nom track record. If Premeditated Chaos joins as a co-nom you'd have a great team behind you. Spicy, I still haven't looked into you because you've seemed more hesitant but are you perhaps interested now too? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:54, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Another example: The Secret Life of Lele Pons just happened to be an article combining my two areas of editing-- Venezuela and Tourette syndrome. This woman is a big deal in Latin America, and it's no surprise that she pops on our top viewed list. I have had to do multiple requests at RFPP [2] [3] to get Lele Pons and The Secret Life of Lele Pons semi-protected, as she got clobbered after the Youtube about her TS/OCD was released. Medical admins could directly have semi'd her. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Well alright then. @PMC: and SandyGeorgia if you're willing to lead the charge as co-noms, I'm happy to give it a try. SandyGeorgia, the "platform" you lay out above sounds good to me. I'd noticed the weird page protection thing at Malaria a few months ago. Happy to look into how widespread it is. Also you saw my recent trip to WP:CP. I was surprised to see there's quite a backlog, and just a few editors appear to be holding back the floodgates. I'd be happy to help out there whenever I've got the time. In spite of my best efforts to appear fully sane, I find the mess of copyright laws somewhat intriguing, almost beguiling... Barkeep49, do you have a rough (or exact) part of September that you're planning for the September flight? Ajpolino (talk) 09:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
In spite of my best efforts to appear fully sane, I find the mess of copyright laws somewhat intriguing, almost beguiling...
- I hope this forms part of your response to Q1, verbatim. Very excited to shower you in glory for my nom statement! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 10:45, 19 August 2020 (UTC)- Ajpolino, send me an email and I'll fill the three of you in with where planning is at. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 11:20, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
- Great ... I will await further info on timing and setup. Glad you decided to take the plunge, Ajpolino; the ‘pedia needs you. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:23, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Buruli ulcer
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Buruli ulcer you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tom (LT) -- Tom (LT) (talk) 08:40, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
More biology orphans
Hey, now that I've buttered you up about a hypothetical RFA, I was wondering if you can spare some time to look at two biology orphans for me? They're a bit beyond my ability: Near-equilibrium enzymatic flux transfer networks and Ub-AMC. As always, no rush, I'll probably forget for awhile and toddle back eventually to poke you about it :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:31, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
- Of course, always happy to see the odd things you find. It's a hectic month in real life, so give me a kick in a couple of weeks if I haven't got to these. I hope all is well! Ajpolino (talk) 03:33, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- Picture me as a magpie turning up every so often with something odd and occasionally shiny :) I'm doing well, hopefully you're having the good get-stuff-done kind of hectic. Cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:17, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Buruli ulcer
The article Buruli ulcer you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Buruli ulcer for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tom (LT) -- Tom (LT) (talk) 01:01, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
April–May 2020 GAN Backlog drive
|
The Invisible Barnstar | |
| Thank you for completing 4 reviews in the April–May 2020 GAN Backlog drive. Your work helped us to reduce the backlog by over 60%. Regards, Harrias talk 07:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Newsletter THANKS!
|
What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar | |
| Initiating and preparing the monthly Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Newsletter was a brilliant idea, and just what WP:MED needed to get the ball rolling. Thanks for your creativity, diligence, and follow-through! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC) |
Orphaned non-free image File:Hit 961 Limestone Coast Logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Hit 961 Limestone Coast Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:41, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Niacin GA review
I am making progress on addressing all second round comments today, and hope to finish by this evening. Please do not close the "Hold." David notMD (talk) 17:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
- @David notMD: No rush, take as much time as you need! Ajpolino (talk) 15:34, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
- I have completed responses to all of the second round comments. Net result of the second round is a shorter article with fewer refs, as some of the duplication, bloat and diversions resolved. When I started my pre-nomination editing the article was at 64,500 bytes and 89 refs, reduced to 59,700 and 84 refs by removing weak content and refs, then expanded to point of GA nomination at 74,500 and 102 refs. Maxed at 90,900 and 125 refs toward end of first round. David notMD (talk) 16:51, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for your contributions to improving this article. Niacin joins Folate, Pantothenic acid, Vitamin B12 and Vitamin C as Good Articles. David notMD (talk) 20:05, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
- I have completed responses to all of the second round comments. Net result of the second round is a shorter article with fewer refs, as some of the duplication, bloat and diversions resolved. When I started my pre-nomination editing the article was at 64,500 bytes and 89 refs, reduced to 59,700 and 84 refs by removing weak content and refs, then expanded to point of GA nomination at 74,500 and 102 refs. Maxed at 90,900 and 125 refs toward end of first round. David notMD (talk) 16:51, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
On my being a GA reviewer - I have been hesitant to try my hand at this function, but will now start to watch the submittals in or related to my area of expertise (nutritional biochemistry). David notMD (talk) 10:45, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
- @David notMD: Great! Every review helps keep the system flowing smoothly. If you encounter any issues or would like another set of eyes on your first review(s), just let me know and I'm happy to help. Happy reviewing! Ajpolino (talk) 14:25, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
RFA nomination
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ajpolino Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:03, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congratulations ... you made it look easy, and all you had to do was be yourself, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:48, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Congratulations
I'm going to go out on a limb here and offer you some early congratulations - welcome to the team. If you ever want to talk something over or get a second pair of eyes, drop me a line. Happy mopping! GirthSummit (blether) 12:48, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congratulations! I've closed your RfA as successful. Good luck with your new tools! Maxim(talk) 13:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you both! I'll try not to break anything important. Girth Summit, I will no doubt take you up on that offer. Cheers! Ajpolino (talk) 13:09, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Ajpolino, congrats! Enjoy your shiny new buttons. :) Glen (talk) 13:12, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congrats from here too! I'm happy to hand over the hat of newest admin, though you won't have to hold that title for long, it seems :). fwiw I really liked your answers to the questions I asked, and I think you will do good things. If you need help, don't hesitate to ask me (though I'm certainly not the most competent user you could reach out to). Best wishes, Eddie891 Talk Work 13:22, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congratulations. Happy mopping, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 13:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congratulations Ajpolino, Happy blocking! :). –Davey2010Talk 13:33, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congratulations on your successful RfA. Well deserved! —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 13:35, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congrats! You may celebrate until you are not the newest admin ;) I'm sure you'll do well - please let me know if you have any questions. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:45, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congrats, good luck with your new tools. Cheers Megan☺️ Talk to the monster 14:57, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- I don't want to say congratulations because everyone else is saying it, but congratulations! Moneytrees🏝️Talk🌴Help out at CCI! 14:58, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congratulations on your successful RfA; you're going to make a terrific administrator. One suggestion I like to give every new admin is to read WP:MUSHROOM (not to be confused with Super Mario ). Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 15:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you all for the congratulations and advice. I'm sure I'll need your help as I get going here. I'm already seeing all kinds of extra buttons, check boxes, et al. that I don't know what to do with. But hey, what could go wrong? Ajpolino (talk) 17:54, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- The first thing you want to try is deleting the main page, or blocking Jimbo... For real though, congrats - I had no doubt you could pass, and I'm confident you'll be a great admin :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Premeditated Chaos: as a thank you I'll delete everything in Category:All orphaned articles first! Looks like if it takes me a few seconds to delete each page, I'll have that sucker cleared out in just 83 hours of sleepless work! Ajpolino (talk) 19:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Just make sure you finish before the arbs wake up and de-hat you. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:21, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Premeditated Chaos: as a thank you I'll delete everything in Category:All orphaned articles first! Looks like if it takes me a few seconds to delete each page, I'll have that sucker cleared out in just 83 hours of sleepless work! Ajpolino (talk) 19:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- The first thing you want to try is deleting the main page, or blocking Jimbo... For real though, congrats - I had no doubt you could pass, and I'm confident you'll be a great admin :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you all for the congratulations and advice. I'm sure I'll need your help as I get going here. I'm already seeing all kinds of extra buttons, check boxes, et al. that I don't know what to do with. But hey, what could go wrong? Ajpolino (talk) 17:54, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congratulations! Keep up the good work! bibliomaniac15 20:59, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Felicitations and welcome to the team. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:31, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congratulations! I see no one has given you the traditional T-shirt yet; here it is. Wear it proudly. There is also a bunch of other nice shiny bling that you are now entitled to; you can read all about that at User:MelanieN/Admin bling. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:42, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
- Congratulations and good luck - belatedly. Donner60 (talk) 11:00, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Copyright advice for admins
Congratulations on passing Wikipedia's ritualistic hazing! As you expressed interest in helping me at Wikipedia:Copyright problems, I will leave the following advice:
- Always look at the page history to determine who added the copyvio, then check their talk page. Copyvios are as much a behavioral problem as a content problem and therefore they tend to come in groups. You will see a lot of serial copyright infringement. I'll let you discover the pain that is Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations in your own time.
- I don't hesitate to block well established editors who are serial copyright infringers (for instance, I blocked Kailash29792 indefinitely late last year without warning because I caught them copying plot summaries twice in a week). The sooner you block them, the less copyvios there are to clean up.
- The only appropriate expiry to use for a copyright block is indefinite. The blocked editor must demonstrate understanding of the copyright policy before they are allowed to edit again. A block that expires doesn't achieve this objective. I typically use the language "in order to continue editing, please provide assurance you understand Wikipedia's copyright policy via the unblock process." and they should answer the following questions - what is copyright, under what circumstances can you copy text/images into Wikipedia, why is it otherwise disallowed and how your editing will change. (Kailash was unblocked after they provided such assurance. Indefinite is not infinite.)
- A combination of copyright problems and a lack of communication on the talk page is a sign that a user does not have sufficient proficiency in written English to edit.
- Contributions of serial copyright infringers can be removed or deleted without proof that each contribution is an infringement. MER-C 17:08, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- @MER-C: Great! Thank you. I'll get back to WP:CP over the next week as I find bits of time. I'll keep posting longer explanations for now so that it's easier for you and the others watching the page to check my work and correct any mistakes I make. If you see me acting foolishly, please do let me know. I've peaked at CCI a few times, but each time the scale of the work to do makes me lose my appetite. Perhaps I'll ease my way in... Anyway, I hope all is well during these crazy times! Ajpolino (talk) 17:49, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Practice ?
Do you want to practice with your new tools on one of the examples I gave at RFA? Lele Pons, Venezuelan Internet star, has Tourette syndrome (and more). Semi-protection at this article expired after one month a few days ago, and vandalism has started up again.[4] I have no idea if one post-protection vandalism edit is enough to re-protect, but this gives you one to practice on. Maybe Girth Summit or Barkeep49 will offer an opinion. Normally, I would watch it for a few more days before approaching WP:RFPP, but I will be doing the back-from-the-cabin drive again! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:26, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
- Now another, [5] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:29, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
- SandyGeorgia, I don't think that would be a controversial protection - I'd suggest sticking another month of semi on since it's started up again so quickly. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 21:14, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi SandyGeorgia, sorry for the slow response. I upped the semi-protection for another month, per GS's suggestion. I do appreciate the example since the interface for each admin action remains completely foreign to me (though I will say I deleted a page last week and am still waiting for the power-thrill everyone promised. Perhaps it takes a few...). Anyway, Girth Summit, thank you for the input. It is much appreciated. If anyone else is still watching this page post-RfA, please feel free to chime in with advice any time. Ajpolino (talk) 22:47, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks! Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi SandyGeorgia, sorry for the slow response. I upped the semi-protection for another month, per GS's suggestion. I do appreciate the example since the interface for each admin action remains completely foreign to me (though I will say I deleted a page last week and am still waiting for the power-thrill everyone promised. Perhaps it takes a few...). Anyway, Girth Summit, thank you for the input. It is much appreciated. If anyone else is still watching this page post-RfA, please feel free to chime in with advice any time. Ajpolino (talk) 22:47, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
- SandyGeorgia, I don't think that would be a controversial protection - I'd suggest sticking another month of semi on since it's started up again so quickly. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 21:14, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
October 2020 GAN Backlog drive!
 | October GAN Backlog Drive As you have taken part in previous GAN Backlog drives, or are a prolific GAN reviewer, you might be interested to know that the October 2020 GAN Backlog Drive starts on October 1, and will continue until the end of the month. |
Question about use of wikipedia citation tools
Are you aware of the following? If you google "wikipedia citation generator" you should get a response that includes Help:Citation tools - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Citation_tools . In your creation of the wikipedia page for Shane Crotty, you did not incorporate the doi's for Crotty's publications. If you use Help:Citation_tools you can improve your productivity and also help to avoid typographical errors. Under the two entries in Help:Citation_tools look at "DOI Wikipedia reference generator" (under Tools) & "Citation Bot" (under Templates). You can enter doi's one at the time in DOI Wikipedia reference generator or you can make a list of doi's in your sandbox as follows: *Ycite X | doi=33333}} *Ycite X | doi=44444}} etc., where you replace "X" by "journal" and "Y" by "{{"" and then run "Citation Bot" by typing in User:Ajpolino/sandbox — this greatly improves productivity in generating publication lists. (I put in Y and X in order to avoid confusing error messages.) Suslindisambiguator (talk)
- Thank you Suslindisambiguator, I was not aware of that tool. Ajpolino (talk) 20:12, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
- A problem is that tool will not produce a PMID from a DOI, while the Diberri tool will produce a DOI from a PMID. Since PUBMED tells us whether areticles are reviews, I prefer to use Diberri. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:39, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Newsletter delivery
Hi, I see you're driving around delivering a lot of newspapers from the back of your pickup truck like the old days. You're familiar with WP:MMS, yes? Natureium (talk) 01:00, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- In theory yes, though in practice I've yet to learn. The first issue had six subscribers so I figured it'd take me less time to deliver the darn thing than to learn to mass-message. Now that the newsletter has hit the big time, perhaps it's time to modernize and have the robots do it on my behalf... Thanks for the note! I hope you're doing well. Ajpolino (talk) 01:24, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- I hadn't actually heard of the newsletter until I saw your deliveries on my watchlist, so I'll have to sign up. I hope you are also doing well. Natureium (talk) 01:26, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Immune electron microscopy
Hi Ajpolino, I hope you are well. Would it not have been better to have left a stub here rather than delete the page? IEM is an established technique, norovirus for example, was discovered using it. You'll have noticed that the rotavirus image that was in the article was one of mine, I could expand the stub. Best wishes. Graham Beards (talk) 20:14, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Graham Beards, sorry for the surprise. I was thinking about a stub or redirect (e.g. Immunoelectron microscopy currently redirects to electron microscope, though that page has no section on immunoEM right now), but hadn't decided quite what to do yet. Sadly, every sentence in the old article is copy/pasted from the cited source. I'm not sure if it'll save you any time, but in case it's helpful I revived this dummy version that has the structure of the old article, the gist of each sentence, and then the cited source. If you'd rather start from the actual old version, rewrite everything, and then I can revdel the old diffs, I'm happy to do that instead, just let me know.
- To the larger point, I'm sure seeing the deletion of an important page in your watchlist is not that exciting. I've G12'd a few articles this week and tried to leave a note to any (even minor) content contributors in case they'd like pieces or sources refunded (e.g. 1, 2). I did see your name in the history at IEM. So apologies for not reaching out more quickly. I'm chipping away at a microbiology-centered CCI now, so if you see any other topics there that pique your interest, let me know and I'm happy to bring sources/text back from the dead. I hope you're doing well! We're holding up here as best we can. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to be useful. Ajpolino (talk) 20:40, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick response. With your blessing, I can restore the article, dump the copyvio and rewrite it. There's no rush of course. Graham Beards (talk) 21:06, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- Well here's a second apology: I forgot you're an admin and can do all that yourself. I'm having one of those forgetful days. In the future, you needn't check with me before reverting or changing up something I've done (administrative or otherwise). I look forward to seeing what you come up with. All the best, Ajpolino (talk) 21:14, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- No need to apologise. And it's nice to meet you. I'll find some decent/recent sources and rewrite the article. In the meantime, I think we can leave it in the phantom zone. Graham Beards (talk) 21:23, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- Well here's a second apology: I forgot you're an admin and can do all that yourself. I'm having one of those forgetful days. In the future, you needn't check with me before reverting or changing up something I've done (administrative or otherwise). I look forward to seeing what you come up with. All the best, Ajpolino (talk) 21:14, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick response. With your blessing, I can restore the article, dump the copyvio and rewrite it. There's no rush of course. Graham Beards (talk) 21:06, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
A Barnstar for you!
|
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
| Thank you for helping out at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations. I'm glad to see that your efforts have closed one case and made a dent in another one. Keep up the good work! :) MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:19, 21 October 2020 (UTC) |
Question about gene categories
Hey, is it weird that there's a bunch of gene articles (like Prostate cancer, hereditary, 4 for example) that all appear to be bot-generated and are sitting in Category:Genes on human chromosome? It looks to me like they're just chilling in a holding category that doesn't actually reflect the chromosome they're on. Am I nuts? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:32, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, it's weird. Pardon me for saying that I remain unimpressed with many of the bot-generated gene articles. Everything in Category:Genes on human chromosome should be re-sorted into a subcategory of Category:Genes by human chromosome (that article has already been added by a human to Category:Human_chromosome_7_gene_stubs which is a subcategory of Category:Genes on human chromosome 7 so that one is all set. You can remove the weird category). It looks like Category:Genes on human chromosome has a whopping 513 articles in it. If you lack the appetite for all that fiddling, I'm happy to add it to my todo list for a rainy day. Interesting find! We never run out of weird things in the gene articles! Ajpolino (talk) 17:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's one of those things I'm not sure should have been done by bot (like many things, including localities and taxonomy). And their titling is super inconsistent - some are the full name like the prostate one up there, and some are the abbreviations. No standardization as far as I can tell.As far as fixing the categorization issue, it's easier said than done. {{Infobox gene}} populates from the hellscape of Wikidata, so you'd have to manually go over to Wikidata and make edits there in order for the template to correctly slot the gene into the correct chromosome category. You could just add the right category by hand to each article, but it wouldn't remove them from the holding category, which doesn't really solve the problem. Personally I despise Wikidata so I doubt I'll be picking up this crusade, but godspeed to you if you choose to accept this mission, lol. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Apologies I somehow missed this message. But egads. I didn't realize the infobox was bringing the category. My most recent personal frustration with {{Infobox gene}} is described in this unanswered call for help. Perhaps in another six months or so, I'll muster the will to find someone who can fix that. I'll add "fix the stupid holding category" to the same section of my to-do list. Philosophically, I'm sure Wikidata is immensely useful for many things. But for now I remain in Category:Users too stupid to understand how Wikidata works. Perhaps someday I'll be enlightened. Ajpolino (talk) 01:27, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's one of those things I'm not sure should have been done by bot (like many things, including localities and taxonomy). And their titling is super inconsistent - some are the full name like the prostate one up there, and some are the abbreviations. No standardization as far as I can tell.As far as fixing the categorization issue, it's easier said than done. {{Infobox gene}} populates from the hellscape of Wikidata, so you'd have to manually go over to Wikidata and make edits there in order for the template to correctly slot the gene into the correct chromosome category. You could just add the right category by hand to each article, but it wouldn't remove them from the holding category, which doesn't really solve the problem. Personally I despise Wikidata so I doubt I'll be picking up this crusade, but godspeed to you if you choose to accept this mission, lol. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Cut-and-paste move of Haemospororida to Haemosporida
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Haemospororida a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Haemosporida. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you.
I'm pretty sure that you now know how to move a page, and as an admin, maybe even do a history merge yourself: see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Fixing cut-and-paste moves. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 07:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- However, history merge appears to be a complex process, so I don't think you should do it since you're a new admin. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 07:22, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Hanif Al Husaini you did see that edit was made in 2015 right? You don't think it's a little rude to template an experienced user for a single edit they made five years ago? In any case, I took care of the histmerge since I was here. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:37, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- I thought that a template followed by a personalized message should be fine. I will try to be more carful when templating someone in the future. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 07:47, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Wow, a blast from the past. By my count that was my 31st edit. Perhaps I wasn't aware of the move tool at the time. Either way, Hanif Al Husaini thank you for catching that. PMC thank you for cleaning up my mess. Ajpolino (talk) 15:28, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- I thought that a template followed by a personalized message should be fine. I will try to be more carful when templating someone in the future. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 07:47, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Hanif Al Husaini you did see that edit was made in 2015 right? You don't think it's a little rude to template an experienced user for a single edit they made five years ago? In any case, I took care of the histmerge since I was here. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:37, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
ack
Red and green are great, but I cannot see the yellow font at all on my screen ... maybe switch to orange or blue? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:04, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- ha ha, crossed in the mail, GMTA! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry about that. Another demerit for not hitting "Show preview" before I save it. Gosh that yellow color is horrible. I suppose I was imagining more of a goldenrod. Apparently we have a {{gold (color)}} which makes This color text. Less bad I suppose. But still not easy on the eyes... Anyway, thanks for all the comments! Getting to them as soon as I can! Ajpolino (talk) 00:08, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- I'm glad you couldn't see it either ... I was afraid it said something about my aging eyes :) Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:12, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry about that. Another demerit for not hitting "Show preview" before I save it. Gosh that yellow color is horrible. I suppose I was imagining more of a goldenrod. Apparently we have a {{gold (color)}} which makes This color text. Less bad I suppose. But still not easy on the eyes... Anyway, thanks for all the comments! Getting to them as soon as I can! Ajpolino (talk) 00:08, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- ha ha, crossed in the mail, GMTA! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
SFNs, Harvnbs, and that pingie thingie
I meant to ping you here as those extra brackets left over from my convert to SFN forced me to learn a new trick! Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:06, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
- Woah! Sophisticated. I must say, while it's a minor hassle to check all the SFN tags to make sure the links are working, it's a huge convenience to have the full ref appear when I hover my mouse over the footnote. So I'm quite taken with the SFN system. At some point I'll have to go back and update the refs in the articles I'd worked on in the past... Anyway, thanks for the show! Sorry I've been less-active-than-I'd-like lately. So much to do; so little time. I hope you're staying well. Ajpolino (talk) 17:13, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
- I learned how to fix it from my FAC review of Portrait of a Musician. But I still have something I can't figure out ... look at the bottom of dementia with Lewy bodies, where error cats appear. It is saying I have an error somewhere. I've checked every link. No idea what that is about. We are well, hope you are too! Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:38, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
- I too am stumped. I tried both the scripts for making these errors un-hide, but came up empty handed... This may be moving into the "Minor annoyances not worth the effort to resolve" column... Ajpolino (talk) 18:07, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
- DrKay to the rescue ... it was an et al issue ... [6] Thanks for trying! Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:24, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
- I too am stumped. I tried both the scripts for making these errors un-hide, but came up empty handed... This may be moving into the "Minor annoyances not worth the effort to resolve" column... Ajpolino (talk) 18:07, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
- I learned how to fix it from my FAC review of Portrait of a Musician. But I still have something I can't figure out ... look at the bottom of dementia with Lewy bodies, where error cats appear. It is saying I have an error somewhere. I've checked every link. No idea what that is about. We are well, hope you are too! Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:38, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
October 2020 GAN Backlog drive
|
|
The Invisible Barnstar | |
| Thank you for completing 2 reviews in the October 2020 GAN Backlog drive. Your work helped us to reduce the backlog by over 48%. Regards, Eddie891 Talk Work 13:44, 19 November 2020 (UTC) |
| | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Ajpolino. 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 the current talk page. |