Open main menu

Wikipedia β

User talk:Tom (LT)

  (Redirected from User talk:LT910001)

Please ping me ({{u}}) if you'd like me to contribute in a discussion on an article talk page.


You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Talk:Human brain's talk page.

WikiProject Anatomy newsletter (#6)Edit

Released January 2018  · Previous newsletter

Hello WikiProject Anatomy participant! This is our sixth newsletter, documenting what's going on in WikiProject Anatomy, news, current projects and other items of interest.

I value feedback, and if you think I've missed something, or don't wish to receive this again, please leave a note on my talk page, or remove your name from the mailing list.

Yours truly, --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:48, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

What's newEdit

Good article new good articles since last newsletter include Thyroid, Hypoglossal nerve, Axillary arch, Human brain, Cerebrospinal fluid, Accessory nerve, Gallbladder, and Interventricular foramina (neuroanatomy)
Essay I write an Introduction to Anatomy on Wikipedia in the Journal of Anatomy [1]
Peer review Vagina receives a lot of attention on its way to good article status.
Before the featured portal process ceased in 2017, this had been designated as a featured portal. We reach two projects goals of 20 good articles, and less than half of our articles as stubs, in July 2017. [2]
Project page A discussion about two preferred section titles takes place here.

Introduction to WikiProject Anatomy and Anatomy on WikipediaEdit

We welcome all those interested in anatomy!

Seeing as we have so many new members, and a constant stream of new editors to our articles, I would like to write in this issue about how our project and articles are arranged.

The main page for WikiProject Anatomy is here. We are a WikiProject, which is a group of editors interested in editing and maintaining anatomy articles. Our editors come from all sorts of disciplines, from academically trained anatomists, students, and lay readers, to experienced Wikipedia editors. Based on previous discussions, members of our project have chosen to focus mainly on human anatomy ([3]), with a separate project for animal anatomy (WP:ANAN). A WikiProject has no specific rights or abilities on Wikipedia, however it does allow a central venue for discussion on different issues where interested editors can be asked to contribute, collaborate, and perhaps reach a consensus.

Project and article structure

Wikipedia has about 5,500,000 articles. Of these, about 20,000 fall under our project, about 5,000 of which are text-containing articles. Articles are manually assigned by editors as relating to our project (many using the rater tool). As well as articles, other Wikipedia pages in our project include, lists, disambiguation pages, and redirects. Our articles are improving over time, and you can have a look at our goals and progress, or last newsletter, to get a better idea about this.

Our articles are structured according to the manual of style, specifically here. The manual of style is a guideline, which "is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply", and prescribes the layout of anatomy articles, most of which follow it.

Our articles are organised in a particular way. Most articles have a infobox in its lead, describing key characteristics about the article. Because we have so many articles, articles are often linked together in different ways. An article tends to focus on the primary topic it is written about. Further information can be linked like this, or piped (like this). We use navboxes, which are the boxes at the bottom of articles providing links to similar topics, as well as hatnotes. Typical hatnotes in articles include {{main}}, {{see also}} and {{further}}. This lets us link to relevant and related articles. The bottom of articles also shows categories, which store groups of related articles.


For interested editors, our project offers a number of additional tools to help edit our articles. On our main page appears a log of the most edited recent articles. An automatic list of recent changes to all our articles is here. We have a list of the most popular pages (WP:ANAT500). To keep abreast of news and discussions, it is best to monitor our talk page, newsletters, and our article alerts, which automatically lists deletion, good article, featured article, and move proposals. We also have a open tasks page for editors to create lists of tasks that other editors can collaborate with. Articles are also manually assigned to a "discipline", so interested editors in for example, gross anatomy, histology, or embryology can easily locate articles via here.

Our project has all sorts of smaller items that editors may or may not know about, including a barnstar, user box ({{User WPAnatomy}}), welcoming template ({{WPANATOMY welcome}}) and fairly comprehensive listing of templates (here).


We are always happy to help out, and I invite new editors, or for those with any questions relating to how to get around the confusing environment that is Wikipedia, to post on our talk page or, for a kind introduction to questions, at the WP:TEAHOUSE.

How can I contribute?Edit

  • Ask questions! Talk with other editors, collaborate - and if you need help, ask!
  • Continue to add content (and citations) to our articles
  • Collaborate and discuss with other editors - many hands make light work!
  • Find a space, task or type of article that you enjoy editing - there are lots of untended niches out there

This has been transcluded to the talk pages of all active WikiProject Anatomy users. To opt-out, leave a message on the talkpage of Tom (LT) or remove your name from the mailing list


Hello Tom (aka Precious one)! Is there a preferred choice of naming to use - i've always thought it was TA but is this the case - particularly for Neuroanatomy articles. Braininfo which is used a lot on the pages uses NeuroNames so things can get a little mixed. The page posterolateral tract (TA) is Dorsolateral fasciculus on Braininfo (NeuroNames) (and FMA). Can you give some guidance here. Seems more helpful to follow Braininfo info, isn't it? --Iztwoz (talk) 17:43, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Hah, thank you for using my proper title (for once)! There seems to be a lot of variation in the way neuro structures are called and I have less experience about which terms are used in general to make a useful statement about which source best reflects that :(. In general factors to consider are:
  • Consistent titles with similar structures (e.g. tracts of the spinal cord can probably all be lumped together under 'x tract')
  • Commonality of use of names (e.g. n gram)
  • English where there's a choice between two fairly similar options (which seems to be the case here)
I think this area may require a little bit more nuance than gross anatomy where we can be guided more easily by TA. Let me know if there's anywhere I can help out. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:11, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Interstitial cellEdit

I closed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Interstitial cell. I also moved Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talk:Interstitial cell to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interstitial cell. I believe what you intended to nominate is now nominated in the correct manner and at the correct venue. Best regards, — Godsy (TALKCONT) 09:08, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

@Godsy many thanks --Tom (LT) (talk) 09:33, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Your Bot RequestEdit

Hi Tom (LT),

I am a programmer and new to Wikipedia. I saw your bot request and wanted to start working on it. I am not sure I have enough experience to operate the bot, but I definitely have enough experience to program it. Once it's programmed maybe we can find a willing operator.

Before I get started, I need to figure out what the message that gets sent to a subscriber should look like. I have created a basic demo of something that might work, but I would like some feedback. You can see it here.

Look forward to helping out.

Kadane (talk) 05:04, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

I made some progress tonight. The code is finished. We just have to figure out what the message will look like that editors will receive. The template is located at User:Kadane/PRV/SampleMessageTemplate. I'll leave an example below for both Engineering and technology and Language and literature.


PR icon.png Hello Tom (LT) This is an automated notification to remind you about unanswered peer review requests at WP:PR (Don't want these notifications? Click to Unsubscribe)

Engineering and technology
Article Date Added
Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Request) 2018-08-03
Planar transmission line (Request) 2018-05-22
PC Perspective (Request) 2018-03-27
Language and literature
Article Date Added
Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 581 (Request) 2018-07-24
Aldus Manutius (Request) 2018-07-12
List of Icelandic writers (Request) 2018-07-08
Puella Magi Madoka Magica (Request) 2018-07-02
Sex (book) (Request) 2018-05-13
Annales (Ennius) (Request) 2018-05-01

You can see a list of all categories at WP:PRWAITING. We hope to see you soon Wikipedia:Peer Review. Happy Reviewing! Kadane (talk) 08:58, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Kadane, that's great! One question - how will you work out which topic someone wants to get messages about? --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:55, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
The bot will know based off of the section heading the person places the {{PRV}} tag under on WP:PRV. If they want multiple update they will have to put {{PRV}} under each section they want to subscribe to. Kadane (talk) 01:22, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Kadane just want to express my thanks again for picking this request up. Much appreciated! --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:09, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Tom (LT) Happy to help Kadane (talk) 01:22, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Status queryEdit

Hello Tom, can you give a look to the Liver page. It was classed as B and an editor recently reclassed it as a C. I changed it back and shortly afterwards the same editor changed it back again. I think it's a B class what do you think? --Iztwoz (talk) 17:18, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

@Rreagan007 thanks for your edits around WP and to the vital articles project. We notice you've set the class of liver to C. Both Iztwoz and I are highly active in the anatomy Wikiproject and have rated thousands of articles - you can check our contributions log to verify this. Liver meets our B class criteria from an anatomy perspective - it is suitably comprehensive, written, has a suitable number of images, is adequately verified; better than C class but worse than a GA, a standard we would consider B class. As far as the grand scheme of things go this isn't that important, but just to let you know I have changed it back to "B". --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:32, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
PS the WikiProject is WP:ANAT - please join us if it's something you're interested in! --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:32, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
@Iztwoz this does make me wonder though... I wonder how much effort it would take to bring this to GA... --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:38, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Probably not a lot. If you wanted to go with this I'll help where I can (and when I can) - time is a bit limited for me these days. Best--Iztwoz (talk) 06:17, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Mass Message to WP:PRVEdit

Hey Tom (LT),

I saw you made a mass message for WP:PRV. I want to help keep the BRFA moving towards approval. I have generated a mailing list that follows the correct formatting at User:Kadane/PRV/Mailing_List. If you want you can move it to your user space so you can make the request. I move back to college on Tuesday and will be back to my regular schedule on Monday the 20th. I am hoping by then we will have enough people sign up to get a trial run approved. Let me know your thoughts. Kadane (talk) 01:09, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Kadane! Was that the entire list of contributors ?!! that's a bit sad, it looked like about 115 or so entries. You may have seen me surreptitiously planning a message or two in the background here (User:Tom_(LT)/Peer_review_mass_message), also quietly debuting a WikiProject here (Wikipedia:WikiProject Peer review). I am still touching up the links and wording and so forth and will send out a message by this Wednesday. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:57, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
It is indeed the entire list of contributors. There are 123 total {{PRV}} tags on the WP:PRV page, but only 88 of them are unique. Here is a better overview of the subscribers and their sections User:Kadane/PRV/Jsondump/Pretty. This bot, the Wikiproject, and your advertising efforts should help bolster numbers going forward. In the mean time, you may want to change your subscription status from annually to monthly during the trial period so that I have enough people to message for the BRFA.
I have been keeping an eye on your contributions, it's looking good. Wednesday sounds great as far as the timeline goes. Will you do me a favor and correct the spelling of my name on your message so that anyone can contact me if they have questions? Best Kadane (talk) 04:14, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
OK, mass message sent. We'll see who responds... --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:11, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Peer review newsletter #1Edit


Hello to all! I do not intend to write a regular peer review newsletter but there does occasionally come a time when those interested in contributing to peer review should be contacted, and now is one. I've mailed this out to everyone on the peer review volunteers list, and some editors that have contributed to past discussions. Apologies if I've left you off or contacted you and you didn't want it. Next time there is a newsletter / mass message it will be opt in (here), I'll talk about this below - but first:

  • THANK YOU! I want to thank you for your contributions and for volunteering on the list to help out at peer review. Thank you!
  • Peer review is useful! It's good to have an active peer review process. This is often the way that we help new or developing editors understand our ways, and improve the quality of their editing - so it fills an important and necessary gap between the teahouse (kindly introduction to our Wikiways) and GA and FA reviews (specific standards uphelp according to a set of quality criteria). And we should try and improve this process where possible (automate, simplify) so it can be used and maintained easily.


It can get quite lonely tinkering with peer review...
With a bit of effort we can renovate the place to look like this!

Update #1: the peer review volunteers list is changingEdit

The list is here in case you've forgotten: WP:PRV. Kadane has kindly offered to create a bot that will ping editors on the volunteers list with unanswered reviews in their chosen subject areas every so often. You can choose the time interval by changing the "contact" parameter. Options are "never", "monthly", "quarterly", "halfyearly", and "annually". For example:

  • {{PRV|JohnSmith|History of engineering|contact=monthly}} - if placed in the "History" section, JohnSmith will receive an automatic update every month about unanswered peer reviews relating to history.
  • {{PRV|JaneSmith|Mesopotamian geography, Norwegian fjords|contact=annually}} - if placed in the "Geography" section, JaneSmith will receive an automatic update every yearly about unanswered peer reviews in the geography area.

We can at this stage only use the broad peer review section titles to guide what reviews you'd like, but that's better than nothing! You can also set an interest in multiple separate subject areas that will be updated at different times.

Update #2: a (lean) WikiProject Peer reviewEdit

I don't think we need a WikiProject with a giant bureaucracy nor all sorts of whiz-bang features. However over the last few years I've found there are times when it would have been useful to have a list of editors that would like to contribute to discussions about the peer review process (e.g. instructions, layout, automation, simplification etc.). Also, it can get kind of lonely on the talk page as I am (correct me if I'm wrong) the only regular contributor, with most editors moving on after 6 - 12 months.

So, I've decided to create "WikiProject Peer review". If you'd like to contribute to the WikiProject, or make yourself available for future newsletters or contact, please add yourself to the list of members.

Update #3: advertisingEdit

We plan to do some advertising of peer review, to let editors know about it and how to volunteer to help, at a couple of different venues (Signpost, Village pump, Teahouse etc.) - but have been waiting until we get this bot + WikiProject set up so we have a way to help interested editors make more enduring contributions. So consider yourself forewarned!

And... that's it!

I wish you all well on your Wikivoyages, Tom (LT) (talk) 00:31, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Your thread has been archivedEdit

Teahouse logo

Hi Tom (LT)! You created a thread called Image editing at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Tom (LT)".