User talk:Mootros/Archives/2011/March

Renaissance architecture

In 2007, Mcginnly, one of the most enlightened contributors in the Wikipedia architectural project, assessed this article as A. Perhaps the criteria for rating an article as "A" has changed. As I recall it, "GA" required a review process, but (in 2007) "A" did not. Demoting the article simply because you cannot find evidence of a review process seems rather poor criteria to me. Did you, by any chance, peruse the article itself? It is probably the best generic article on the subject of architectural history on Wikipedia. It has been stable for a very long time, except for occassional tweaks and additions to the regional section, made by people with local knowledge. Demoting it at this point in time is foolish. Can I suggest that you employ some discretion with older, stable, well-referenced, articles?

I notice that you have also demoted Architecture of cathedrals, basilicas and abbey churches. If you look at its history, it is apparent that its format has recently been greatly changed, its area of coverage expanded and its picture selection rethought. On these grounds, it needs reassessment.

Amandajm (talk) 06:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I see your point, but still wonder how one person can assess an A-Class article. This should be a collaborative activity within your project, not an individual contributor. (GA already requires this as a minimum standard) . Are you interested insetting up an A-Class review for your project. Have a look here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Crime/Assessment/A-Class_review and let me know what you think. Many thanks! Mootros (talk) 09:45, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply! One of my problems is, my internet connection keeps dropping out and everything I do takes longer than it ought. I would like to contribute more, but sometimes I simply have to save what I have written and try 6 times to upload it! It's frustrating. The weekends are almost impossible because to service to our area is so poor. It's ridiculous. (rave rave rave).

I really believe in Wikipedia as a service to humanity, but the thought of forcing things through review, when I could be writing, doesn't excite me. I am amazed at people who have lists of articles that are FAs and DYKs! What I really like doing is writing the large generic art and architecture articles. There are still several important ones which are quite inadequate. I keep telling myself I'll get around them now I have a bit more time. Amandajm (talk) 11:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to hear about your connection, Amandajm! Of course writing is equally important. I'll speak to some of your fellow project members at some point and explain that your project can easily set up such process. Indeed this simple and informal process could be seen as collaborative editing exercise. Again, may thanks for contacting me. Glad to meet you. I shall look forward to meet you again. Yours, Mootros (talk) 11:42, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

hi

yes, there is no formal discussion on the project pages. but, it was discussed reasonably over time in different discussions participated by the most active project members. if you don't agree to the ranking, of course, you can post to the project discussion page. thanks for the concern. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 16:00, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for your reply. I'm not so much concerned about individual articles on your project, but about the lack of visible discussion for A-Class grades. Discussion can be informal too, if members of your project think this is fine. Would you like me to set up an automated A-Class review mechanism? I.e. if you change a Bangladesh banner to A-Class, a link appears on the banner that leads to a page where one can note (in what ever format your project finds useful) the rational/ discussions and everybody can see how and the A-Class was agreed. If you find this suitable, I'll put in the code into your project banner and you should be set. You then can decide how formal you want the process surrounding the completion of the assessment/documentation page. Very easy and it would make your A-Class look much more credible! Let me know, I'll show you an example. Mootros (talk) 18:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

That would be of great help. Currently the Bangladesh project has less than 10 active members, and a lot of processes are not as good as they should be. Thank you so much (and that's not being just polite, I really mean it). Cheers. It's so nice to talk to people who understand and help out. Cheers again. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 03:44, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Aditya, Good to see your enthusiasm! I am happy to put in the code, within the next few days. I'll let you know when it is ready. Have a look at this link, for an example of a rather formal process. You may not want to make as formal as this, especially if you're only ten active members. For a test example add this sting to any talk page and press review: {{WikiProject Crime|A-Class=current|class=GA|importance=high}}. I am going to add myself to your project as an "associated member" and would happily give support and advice on developing adequate processes that fit the need of your project. Again I have to thank you for your enthusiasm and good spirit. Mootros (talk) 00:28, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Yayy. That would be great. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 07:24, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Awesome. This should work. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 17:45, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

[Disconnected?]

First, I have no idea if anyone will even read this. Secondly; I am not affiliated with any political party. Hitler was facinated by Wagner. Das Rhinegold was a favorite of Hitler's. When the hero is burned he, in death, raises his arm and extends his hand so that the "all powerful" ring would not fall into the hands of the unworthy. Wherever the salute came from is not as important as the idea that Hitler saw it as a promise to same Germany from the unworthy. No, I am not anti-semetic... not anti anything.98.91.55.61 (talk) 16:04, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I have no idea what you're talking about, in relation to which article or edit. Best if you could provide a link to the issue that concerns you, if this is not a mix up. All the best, Mootros (talk) 18:40, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I signed my name here ya go

Ok now I'm lost but... It said new message here soo here I go.... I found a way to sign a talk page after creation see here User_talk:Iamiyouareyou/Pages/_Incremental_Service_Awards Iamiyouareyou (talk) 15:45, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Excellent! Steady on! Mootros (talk) 16:28, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[wrong place]

I cannot fathom what you think you are trying to accomplish over at WP:SERVICE and I'd suggest that you back off.

First of all, the issue of the edit count being wildly too high at the upper levels was discussed extensively by a number of editors, the need for reform was accepted, and the precise numbers for this reform were hashed out. Please see Wikipedia talk:Service awards/Archive 5#Overlarge edit count requirements, Wikipedia talk:Service awards#Lowering the edit requirements - making it happen and other places.

You had plenty of opportunity to participate in these discussions, and if your personally find the result unpleasing that's too bad but that's how the system works.

Second of all, the reform has been carried out. Scores of users have been notified and their levels altered, which took a bit of time and effort and cannot reasonably be reversed. It is over and done.

Third of all, the levels which you are insistently reverting to are ridiculous. No human editor can achieve one million edits. I assume you know this and are simply being annoying for the sake of being annoying. Cut it out, please. Herostratus (talk) 05:37, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Please reply there were the discussion is going and stop using this intimidating language! Mootros (talk) 16:29, 31 March 2011 (UTC)