User talk:The Transhumanist/Archive 8

Hi TT. You've asked some tough questions, which is why I've taken time to answer them.

As you point out to me, you nowhere define "basic topics" (or wikilink to a definition). Create your own definition for this list (read on for how).

I think the fundamental question is neither comprehensiveness, nor RS, but actually POV. In other words, who says that these are the basic topics, not others (excluded) or that the ones listed are indeed basic topics that shouldn't be removed from the listing. At first glance I spotted Mental mapping and thought, "hmm, interesting, but is that a fundamental topic of Geography?". Maybe it is. And maybe it isn't. A Featured List cannot be subject to POV... and this is. So, how do you tackle the POV?

Now, I actually think that answering this question (if it's possible to do so) will answer the RS question too... as you need to find an RS that lists something that approximates to a list of basic geography topics.

And of course, it also answers the comprehensiveness issue too, as anything in your RS should be in, and anything else should not.

The list of notable geographers is, once more, totally POV and should be struck, unless you can find a RS that lists a "top X geographers of all time".

All the other issues you raise are minor tweaks by contrast with this all-encompassing problem. Crack it first, I'd suggest.

Hope that's helpful. --Dweller 10:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC) PS The External links section is too horrible for words. And the See also is very odd.[reply]

Mental mapping is one of the 18 National Geography Standards of the National Council for Geographic Education.

The geographer section is intended to list some examples, to get the reader started. How is that POV? I gathered them from Wikipedia's history of geography article.

And what is odd about the see also section?

The Transhumanist 12:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Let's keep the conversation here) Your mental mapping answer is the way forward. Explain and cite the inclusion. Tackle all of the sections on that kind of basis and you deal with all objections of POV, comprehensiveness and RS. Geographers section is plainly POV. Why haven't you included any of 1000 other geographers? Let's leave discussing detail like the external links and see also sections until you've dealt with these massive issues. --Dweller 12:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because the purpose of the section is to present some examples of the practioners of the field, as a lead-in for the study of geographers. But if you need an official short list of the greatest geographers, or the most influential, or a list that is the most fundamental/basic for educational purposes, then there's probably a list like that out there in the world somewhere. This is supposed to be an introduction to geography. If examples can't be provided of one of the main components of the field (the people in it), then editors' hands are being unnecessarily tied behind their backs.

Please check "the essence" section, to see if the lead is sufficient. The Transhumanist 17:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TT, I understand why you've included them, it's just that it's impossible for you to justify the inclusion of some, rather than others, as being anything other than your subjective decision. Why not (as a thought) point to daughter articles of types of Geographers, rather than listing any names at all? (List of geologists, List of human geographers, List of laddyda (I don't know much about geography, does it show?!) And Featured criteria does tie hands - you can't take a bio to FA no matter how good it is if there's no decent free image of the subject.

I'll take a look at the essence section when I get a mo. --Dweller 18:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that the inclusion of examples is inescapably POV? (How else could an editor select the presentation of one example over all other possible examples?)

Does this mean that every example provided within Wikipedia's pages in the main namespace violates WP:NPOV? The Transhumanist 18:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm saying is that when it comes to Featured material, there's more exacting standards. Ask TRM for a second opinion? Happy to listen to his thoughts - he has more FAs than me! --Dweller 23:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure? Are there written FA standards on this? The featured article Hoysala architecture has a list of examples, that seems to be entirely analagous to the list of examples I wish to include. Images that present examples abound on featured articles, and their selection doesn't seem to differ in any way from how links are chosen to be examples. The way you are applying NPOV does not appear to be a standard of featured articles. I tried finding style guidelines on the presentation of examples in Wikipedia articles, and I couldn't find any. There's an essay stub called Wikipedia:Give examples. For an an extreme example of the presentation of examples on Wikipedia, see Examples of groups, an expansion page of Group (mathematics). For a treatment of examples in the real world, see List of mathematical examples. The Transhumanist 23:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You either voted on the original list of the day proposal or the revised version. A more modest experimental proposal is now at issue at WP:LOTDP. Feel free to voice your opinion.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear TH, I again humbly come to you with yet another padding issue. It seems that my brain has some sort of mental block, as it appears that padding is the single bane of my design endeavors. I'm yet again trying to get text to stop being bumped right up against a picture box, you can see it here, and I tried putting into place the fixes you'd shown me earlier on someone else's design, but alas, they did nothing this time. Some silly tweak I've done I'm sure, lol. If you have a minute, if you would be so kind to yet again, fix my silly padding issues, I would be so grateful. ~*Curtsy*~ Ariel♥Gold 00:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, yet again, you've come with the magic wand and fixed it. Margin... padding... argh, lol. So, do I understand this right? Margins placed inside a box's borders, will actually affect how text interacts with the outside of the box? No wonder I don't figure it out, that doesn't seem to make much sense, lol. I would think the margins inside a box would make the information inside that box smaller, and have no effect on anything outside the box. Maybe I'm still not getting it, though (should I be thinking "outside the box"? hee hee). And omigosh, thanks so much for the hidden emoticon stuff! That was so cute! Anyway, I'm sorry to always come to you with silly little issues, but I hope you know how much I appreciate that you've always taken the time to fix them, and some day maybe I'll figure this padding/margin thing out! Ariel♥Gold 04:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Margins placed in a box's code will place spacing on the outside of the box. Padding in a box's code will place spacing on the inside of the box. I added margins to the box the picture was in. Padding for a box does not affect spacing between elements that are inside that box.

Ahhh, okay that clears it up, I hope! Now if I can remember it next time I run into this issue, that will be the challenge, lol. And who knew there were so many smilies! lol. Have you found every one? I've been looking for the :p smiley, you found it! Smiley 11. That will come in handy, hee hee. Okay I'm off to bed! Thank you again, Oh Wise One, for your wonderful assistance! Ariel♥Gold 04:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found one you missed! Ariel♥Gold 04:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I haven't found every one, new ones pop up from time to time. Though I don't grab every one -- I picked most of the ones on my list because they have relatively small file sizes, and don't slow down page loads much. For places to look, see emoticon, list of common emoticons, Category:Emoticons, and commons:Category:Smilies. (the last one has the most)     The Transhumanist 05:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I got mine from the Commons category, but honestly, even if you loaded up a page with smileys, it wouldn't affect server performance. I mean, consider that these are 15kb tiny images. Now, think about some people's signatures, lol. There are signatures bigger in size than these little bitty pictures. Granted, as I mentioned on my talk page, I don't think they are something to sprinkle all over, but I have found that with the medium of text being difficult to convey tone or intent, a well-placed smiley can go a long way towards letting someone know that you mean your comments as humor, or in a kind way, to avoid misunderstanding. All that rambling being said, I am glad you gave me the smileys and links, because I wanted one with the tongue stuck out to use on occasion, lol! Hope you're having a fantastic Thursday! Ariel♥Gold 17:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I understand your position, Auroranorth is currently blocked due to disruptive editing using TW. For him to access to any automated tools is counter productive. He had only just completed a period probation after being unblocked for operating sock puppets. AWB requires editors to have had 500 edits, once he returns from this block and has 500 edits without issue I'll restore him to the list. Gnangarra 12:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Gnangarra. There's plenty Auroranorth can do without semi-automated tools like Twinkie or AWB. He needs to show a sustained period that he can be trusted to drive a normal car before being given the keys to the Ferrari. No-one is suggesting that his editing is deliberately disruptive, but experience shows he needs to be supervised closely: when I blocked him the other day I hoped it would encourage him reflect on the damage that can be caused by careless editing. I (along with several others) will rejoice when I can take his talk page off my watchlist and not feel the need to review his activities every few days. PS: You are doing a wonderful job with his coaching and I applaud you for that. —Moondyne 14:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better safe than sorry. You're right, there are plenty of things to do without the tools. Those need to learned too. No problemo. The Transhumanist 02:41, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dearest The Transhumanist,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 137 supports, 22 opposes, and 5 neutrals. Your efforts as my admin coach and your kind words of strong support are very much appreciated and I look forward to proving you right. I would like to give special thanks to The_undertow and Phoenix-wiki for their co-nominations. Thank you again and best regards.

Lara❤Love 20:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply] Credits: This RFA thanks was inspired by The Random Editor's RFA thanks which was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks.

Please go here. Laleena 20:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't go. Hide out at the VC for awhile. You can use it as your base of operations. The Transhumanist 02:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note left on my coaching page for you. Auroranorth 04:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dearest The Transhumanist,

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

—John McCrae

On Remembrance Day (or Armistice Day - Veterans Day in the US) we remember those soldiers who sacrificed their lives so their countries could live in freedom. We use poppies to remember the blood shed by soldiers in Flanders Fields, a major European battleground. The poem In Flanders Fields was written during World War I but Remembrance Day commemorates all lives lost to war, especially after the first of the World Wars. The observance is not to glorify war but to remember those who suffered. Very few people remained untouched by the effects of World War I.

Memorial services held today often include the Ode of Remembrance. The ode finishes with these words:
We will remember them.
Auroranorth 04:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Am I going in the right direction with List of basic literature topics? Auroranorth 07:46, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

see your coaching page. --TT

The list is quite clearly heading towards a no consensus right now and even if it gets more support, one really can't ignore opposition from three users. There is no active discussion right now so I could close it right now, but I'll let you choose if you want it closed now or if you would rather leave it open a few more days in hopes of persuading a user to drop their opposition. -- 01:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Added feedback may be very useful. A few more days would be fine. Thank you for asking. The Transhumanist 14:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My personal closure policy is to leave it 12 days if it is definitely not heading for a pass, so I'll leave it for two more days. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yo. Let's agree to disagree on this one. --Dweller 16:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

12 days is fine with me. Thank you, Scorpion. Dweller, we're not in hostile conflict, the issue at this point isn't whether or not it will pass, but feedback. I'd like to maximize feedback, so I can handle as many issues as possible before preparing the list for resubmission. Keep in mind that the geog list is forging the way for future lists of this type, both in their general design, and in their development as FLCs. That's why I kept pressing you for answers. Also, I'm on a learning curve here.  ;-) The more feedback the better. The Transhumanist 20:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I recommend you drop The Rambling Man a line. I greatly respect his opinion. And he's pretty experienced with the featured criteria for lists and articles. --Dweller 20:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I look forward to his advice. The Transhumanist 07:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I got the padding thing, figured that out with this newest project, but now I'm struggling with a centering issue, three boxes, the second (middle) box refuses to center align, and instead bumps up against the edge of another, no matter what I do with the margins of the outside box. ~*Sigh*~ I think it is probably a margin issue? But I'm not sure what the proper wording is, I tried setting margins for the outside box, but that did not work, lol. Anyway, if you have a little time and could take a peek, again, you know I'll be greatly appreciative. (And sorry to come to you with such silly little issues so often, lol) Ariel♥Gold 22:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The Transhumanist 06:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Omg, and I just realized I didn't even give you the link to what I needed! LOL I'm sooo sorry for that, and it was wonderful of you to figure it out! Gosh, what a ninny I am, lol. And yeah I thought it might have something to do with that, but I wasn't sure quite how I could solve it. Again, I bow down to your coding genius, lol. Thank you so much! Ariel♥Gold 07:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to meet true coding geniuses, check out nestable templates.  ;-) The Transhumanist 07:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL The trick is I actually have about 6 sandboxes, all with various names like /project /Projects /Sandbox2, lol. Thankfully I was using the first one I came across and it happened to be the last one you fixed, lol. Nestable templates, huh? Sort of sounds like a kind of bird, lol. Ariel♥Gold 07:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested in advanced code? Here's a set of templates I worked on with Audacity for the welcoming committee. He taught me some things on that project:

• {{subst:W-basic}} → standard template, similar to Template:Welcome with additional options
• {{subst:W-shout}} → extroverted message with bold advice
• {{subst:W-short}} → concise; won't overwhelm
• {{subst:W-link}} → shortest greeting, links to WC's greetings page
• {{subst:W-graphical}} → graphical menu format to ease transition from the graphic-heavy web
• {{subst:W-screen}} → graphical; designed to fit the size of the user's screen
• {{subst:Wel}} ~~~~ → automatically identifies anonymous or registered users

I got most of my format training working on the philosophy portal, the Main Page redesign, the help page overhaul, and the community portal overhaul. My overhaul of the community portal was rejected (except for the Community Bulletin Board and the TOTD), but it was for the best, because one section of my version became the Department directory.

The most intricate graphical formatting I ever worked on (back when I was named "Go for it!") was on Wikipedia:Department directory, which uses advanced table formatting. The early versions had triple borders! I couldn't have completed the page at all if it wasn't for Rossami and Catherine, who generously and patiently tutored me in the intricacies of borders, tabling, and nesting tables. I stored their examples and my homework on the following pages:

• User:Go for it!/table tests
• User:Go for it!/table test 1
• User:Go for it!/table test 2

The best template programmer I know is CBDunkerson. He programmed template:Totd-random, which I based my random task generator on.

The most prolific wiki-layout artist I know is AGK. We worked together to overhaul Wikipedia's welcome page. AGK has redesigned his user page so many times that I've lost count. His UP's history is a great example farm for page format encoding.

I hope you find the above examples useful. Enjoy.

The Transhumanist 09:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, lol. I've done some minor template work, mostly just custom user notices/warnings, using 1-2 variables, a little bit of infobox tweaking, and my own messing around designing things for myself and others. I think the biggest challenge I had lately was trying to format this page to clear up my watchlist some, I wanted tabs that would lead to different pages, and highlight when active, like the Portal:Science portal uses. I finally figured it out, but I think it took me all day, lol. I really don't have a high enough level of knowledge about .css code and intricacies of some of the quirks here to be able to do super fancy stuff like your table examples, unless I copy and tweak from another source, lol. I've had the bug to redesign my userpage lately, but so far I'm resisting it lol. Thanks for all those links, if nothing else, they are a source of awe and inspiration to me! I think my basic problem is that I'm not a "coder" by profession, so while others sort of "see" in code language what changes and symbols do, I am not able to do that, and have to just make flying guesses and preview to see what changes, if anything, lol. Nested tables are probably one of the things that frustrate me the most, as you've seen, lol. Thanks again for all those links, though, I think I'll drop those somewhere for future reference to see how things should be done. Thank you thank you, again! Ariel♥Gold 22:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The examples are useful as starting points on most table configurations. But my big secret is external memory - check this out: User:The Transhumanist/Resources. The Transhumanist 00:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hee hee, yeah I have more than one pages of "cheatsheets", lol. I think you probably are able to "see" what the coding means, though, where I really don't know what all the commands do. I never really got much past basic HTML, because WYSIWYG editors came along, and I ended up using those in the 90s, lol. Ah well, I am blessed that there are editor's such as you, and Phae when she's around, who are so helpful and wonderful, and smart and funny, to go to when I get in over my head. ~*Grin*~ Ariel♥Gold 00:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, been a while, and as I'm sure you can appreciate, time has been precious, but I'm doing my best to go over my talk page requests for comment, and in that spirit, you have List of basic geography topics up at WP:FLC. I understand there's been a level of opposition and I also believe that you're not 100% happy with the previous outcome. That nothwithstanding I'd like to give you some comments that you may appreciate or you may entirely disregard, I'm not familiar with reviewing lists of basic topics, I'm a specialist kind of guy. So, take my comments as you will, and all the best with them!

1. Lead is a bit essay-ish. The emphasis and italicising isn't quite what I'd expect from a neutral encyclopaedia. (Don't get me wrong, it makes you want to read more, but that seems to be stuff of the 1930s encyclopaedias!)
2. "...is comprised of..." - classic grammar argument. Avoid the argument - "...is composed of..."
3. In-line external links are avoidable. Make them references. So I'd ditch 18 National Geography Standards for example, make it a proper {{Cite web}} link. It may make accessibility to said site more difficult but it's going to help make the article more elegant.
4. Who said the "National Council for Geographic Education" knew what they were talking about? American council? Not sure but we need to be eclectic.
5. "as in "the New England states", or as one part of a larger whole, as in "the state of New York, located in the United States". " - again, let's be globally biased, not US-centric.
6. Not massively worrying but if I was making an FL, then I wouldn't have navboxes which didn't have major topic pages, such as Regions of North America. Create them.
7. Political divisions section is a bit, well.... sad?
8. "Some specific areas" section is very geographically biased - you have the globe to choose from, these seem quite Pacific-centric.
9. Minor point but images vary in size throughout, I'd opt for a uniform thumb size.
10. It may have been raised before but there are no citations. Mostly it's okay but things like atmosphere composition needs to have something to accredit it, especially in these controversial "Days of Gore"...
11. I think Dweller may have stated before, there is always going to be an issue of WP:POV with things like "Some notable geographers".
12. The external links aren't my kettle of fish. Most of them should probably be linked to from sub-topics. In fact, I'd be surprised if this topic needed any external links beside the references I'd like to see that I mentioned above.

Perhaps not the review you were looking for - I'd prefer to take the article on it's "right now" status, review it per "my standards" - but please take it all with a pinch of salt - I'd like to learn more about where you're going with this and if I can help you get it there. The Rambling Man (talk) 00:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Critical feedback is exactly what I'm looking for. I'd like to develop the list to featured status without sacrificing its original purpose. I've fixed most of the problems you've pointed out...

1. removed italics, reduced wordiness.  Done
2. removed "is comprised of".  Done
3. replaced inline external links.  Done
4. Added refs: National Geographic stands behind the standards, and explains where they came from, etc.  Done
5. Remove US-centric examples from region section, and replaced with non-specific examples.  Done
6. The red main links on nav boxes have been turned blue, or removed.  Done
7. "Sad" didn't give me much to go on. Replaced lone link with section lead.  Done
8. The Bermuda Triangle is in the Atlantic, not the Pacific. For "specific areas", areas that aren't already within the scope of the other sections on the page are not easy to find. I could use some help here.  Not done
9. Set all right-hand images to 400px. The animated one won't change size.  Done
10. Citations - will take some work.  Not done
11. Geographer section needs a new list, from a single source.  Not done
12. I've come across some webpages on "basic geography". Those would be especially on-topic for the external links section. I need to spend some time browsing curriculum standards.  Not done

Your feedback was helpful, and doable. Thank you. One objection in the FLC pertained to the scope of sections, but it didn't make any sense. That objection can't be accomodated without removing 80% of the list. That would circumvent the purpose of the list. But the main hurdle will be citations. That's tied in with the absense of a definition for "basic". A major objection was that the includability of items wasn't verified, which necessitates a source for each section (which will dictate the contents of each section), or failing that, each item. The Transhumanist 07:59, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You voted for one of my prior proposals to institute a List of the Day Proposal. I may have already alerted you to an experiment I am conducting at WP:LOTD. Now that the experiment is running I can point out the benefits to the project of the method I am experimenting with that other alternatives don't offer. First, there is a set of orphaned articles for persons who do not have any featured lists of their own or persons that would like to take responsibility for more. Anyone can nominate such orphans. This benefits WP by getting people involved in list articles that might not have active editors to update them or defend them against vandalism. Please consider adopting one of our orphans.

There are several other advantages that will improve the project:

1. Each list will be encouraged to respond to commentary and feedback during the candidacy period, which will hopefully improve the quality of the articles.
2. Articles without pictures will be encouraged to find them. E.g., List of Harry Potter films cast members had no image before its nominator added an image for this experiment. This type of thing, of course, improves the project.
3. Articles are encouraged to add relevant projects to their talk page. This alerts other project to articles that they would likely have an interest in and would be able to either improve or protect.

Again come by and consider adopting one of our orphans this month or in future months either adopt an orphan or give feedback on the candidates.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 17:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are drawing out the same plan that does not improve the project as is essentially under consideration right now. What I am saying is that if I could get interest in doing it the way that improves the project, I am willing to do so and am running an experiment right now. However, it seems all those who have produced a lot of FLs are attempting to push through a method that does not improve the project. If I could get those people behind an idea that improves the project we could really do some good. That is why I am pointing out the ways my method would improve the project.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 19:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is that the current proposal entails cut and pasting excerpts, whereas I suggested supplying a link only. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 23:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are distinguishing display methods. I am attempting to distiguish selection methods and demsonstrate that the method I propose has the benefit of improving the project.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 16:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your selection method will default to a single individual ordering the FLs, just to keep up with the built-in quota of 365 noms per year. Either that, or the project will redlink (show a redlink instead of a LOTD). The Transhumanist 16:24, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are saying that since it appears that less than 30 nominees exist the project will default to a single person selecting the LOTDs. I think instead I may nominate random FLs up to 40 and see if I can get persons interested in saying which 5 they like the most. If people neither want to nominate or provide feedback, I am not sure I will continue with the experiment.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 16:58, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a variation on the same theme. It's busywork. The lists already passed the FLC nomination process. Why force them through another one? It's an unecessary level of bureaucracy. The Transhumanist 17:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw, good work, thanks will continue tonight. --Stefan ^talk 06:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And it's still empty! (substantively speaking) Someguy1221 (talk) 07:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on it right now.  :-) The Transhumanist 07:29, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw it was you and figured there was more to come. Just making sure you haven't fallen off your rocker ;-) Someguy1221 (talk) 07:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a rocker, I am a rocker. I do have a rocket though, but haven't fallen off yet.  :-) The Transhumanist 07:35, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glossary of wine terms. Where can one find your criterions for being nominated? --victor falk 02:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only featured lists are displayed in this LOTD program, and those are scheduled in the order they became featured lists. To nominate a list for featured status, see WP:FLC, but be prepared for a ton of work. The Transhumanist 18:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:54, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A few templates you created, Template:MainPageIntroNew and Template:MainPageIntroNew2, have been marked for deletion as deprecated and orphaned templates. If, after 14 days, there have been no objections, the templates will be deleted. If you wish to object to their deletion, please list your objections here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the templates. If you feel the deletions are appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. Bryan Derksen (talk) 04:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I applied for an award in your Award Center, and worked hard to fulfill the request, but never recieved the award. Can you please give it to me? • EvanS :: talk § email § photos • 19:41, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Will be glad to. For future reference, please read the page's instructions. Thank you. And congrats. The Transhumanist 05:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the award!!! I moved it all into one box and you can see what I did here. Something weird happens on my computer when I click on your username, but I still think its the best way to fit it in unless you can help me think of a better idea. • EvanS :: talk § email § photos • 15:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, feel free to change the problem with the link to your userpage at that page if you know how & can. • EvanS :: talk § email § photos • 15:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I have quite a bit on my plate so I'm not sure when I'll get to the other basic topics lists, but I think the lists are a great resource and the WikiProject an excellent idea. I'll add my name to the members list before I forget.

What would you think about trimming the basic philosophy topics list somewhat, and merging some sub-sections? I'm inclined to say that more brevity would perhaps benefit readers rather than more detail, but you know the goals of the lists better than anyone. :-)

— xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 22:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the Service badge you gave me earlier on! Cheers!! --Zacharycrimsonwolf 14:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was a huge surprise for me. Thanks a million for the change! --Zacharycrimsonwolf 05:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your consideration and kind words, it's appreciated! --BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 17:21, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Index Lists, a complex issue which I've tried to summarize. It concerns unsourced pages in mainspace like List of timelines, List of basic mathematics topics, and List of film topics. Its scope is currently a few hundred pages, and potentially a few thousand pages. Feedback would be appreciated. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:41, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I got edit conflicted with you for a moment there. You might want to check all your edits are still there... Sorry about that! Carcharoth (talk) 21:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right now, I can only be on Wikipedia as a small-time contributor - so don't expect any assignments completed any time soon, I'm sorry! Auroranorth (!) 12:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep up the good work at school. There will be plenty of work waiting for you when you have more time. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 12:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm! Thanks. It's not just school! Auroranorth (!) 12:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I commented on the list proposal you constructed. I don't think its a matter of overwhelming consensus against you but that Wikipedians have stopped taking this List of the day fiasco seriously, for the moment anyway. IvoShandor (talk) 14:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a real piece of crap, and I need someone to help with it. Please respond on my talk page. Best, --Gp75motorsports (talk) 23:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...where do I go if I want my userpage overhauled. My main userpage is currently fully protected, so it won't be accessible for a while. Thanks and happy holidays, -Goodshoped 00:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a link to the User Page Design Center at the top of this page. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 04:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I checked it out. -Goodshoped 04:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...but it might be a little tough to execute. I was thinking of something that would put together a userpage for you. When you access the page, you'll be presented with eight primary interests, or things that you like that you want to be on your userpages. Then you'd be led to a page where you could scroll through various predesigned userpages. After you select a pre-designed userpage, you select a color scheme consisting of three colors. After you enter your username, the custom userpage would be downloaded to yours. Again, it might be a little tough to constuct, but if you succeed in getting it to work, then it'd be a lot easier for those who don't want to go through all that boring, sensitive syntax. Reply on my talk page. Best, --Gp75motorsports (talk) 02:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Thanks for the userpage! It looks really sweet. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 02:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a programmer, but here's the next best thing: Userpage design center.

The Transhumanist 04:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yeah, I've been there before. Do you know anyone here who's a programmer? I'm trying to see if I can get someone to put it into beta. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 11:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do know some, but that isn't the type of project that would interest them. You should ask the people at WP:BOTS. If it can be done in an automated fashion on Wikipedia, they would know how. The Transhumanist 11:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. Headed there pronto. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 15:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should have some real fun with this. User:AlasdairGreen27 needs some real work on his, as he lives in a trailer. He said he'd get around to it, but he never has. have fun! Best, --Gp75motorsports (talk) 22:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't generally raid peoples' user pages. If you don't think he would mind, you could fix it up for him, but you should probably ask him first. I'm always glad to help users who come to me for assistance. Sometimes I give them a fish, and sometimes I teach them to fish (you know, like the saying), depending on my mood. The Transhumanist 22:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've already asked him. He said he's eagerly waiting. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 23:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, cool. I can't wait to see what you turn it into. If you run into trouble, let me know. (Don't worry, it's easy. You can do it. Just cut and paste stuff from the WP:UPDC) The Transhumanist 01:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason why the lists repeat at {{lotd}}?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 22:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It's explained in a comment at the top of the template (click edit this page to see it). The Transhumanist 23:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have a question (well a few) about portals and ArielGold said you were an expert in this area. So, if you are not totally busy with existing projects/problems could you look at my portal I just started. Right now, it's in my user area, User:Rocketmaniac/South Carolina2. Actually I copied most of the code from the North Carolina portal Portal:North Carolina. Now that I am done with the beginning edits, I found that clicking on the normal "edit" does not bring me to the actual data. For example, I must go to User:Rocketmaniac/South Carolina2/Intro to edit the intro section. Did I do something wrong? Or did I copy a bad example of a portal? ArielGold thinks it has to do with the fact that it in my user area and will be ok once I move it to the "real" area. (for the actual discussion see User talk:ArielGold page. I am basically new to wikipedia editing so any help is welcomed. Thanks for your time. Rocketmaniac (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's fixed. The Transhumanist 01:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WOW, you made it look easy. Many thanks. In your opinion, what else needs to be (or should be) done to the portal before going live with it? Again, thank you for you help. Rocketmaniac (talk) 02:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there is no featured article on a South Carolina topic, select one yourself from the encyclopedia, and rename that section "Selected article". The section "Today in South Carolina history" requires ongoing upkeep (one entry per day). Therefore, unless you want to track down 365 entries per year for that section, you should replace that section with something else, or just remove it. Once you've done the these things, look over ten other portals. Implement any good ideas you get from doing that, and then go live. Have fun. The Transhumanist 02:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, it's me again. Another question. (I've reviewed 10 other portals and there are a few things/sections I'd like to add to mine) What did you actually do to fix/undo my errors .... so I don't make the same error/mistake again in my editing. Rocketmaniac (talk) 03:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. When you get the time, please look at the "related portals" and "related wikiProject". When you click on the normal edit button, it goes off to another weird page. After that is fixed, I would like to "go live". Rocketmaniac (talk) 12:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never Mind I figured out why those two sections did work and fixed it. (it scary, but I think I'm actually getting the hang of this wiki-editing). Now to figure out how to move it. Rocketmaniac (talk) 13:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Big Science, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Big Science was previously deleted as a result of an articles for deletion (or another XfD)

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Big Science, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 03:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It's been six months since your last RfA. I've just refreshed my memory by reading through the oppose !votes and they were mostly prompted (IMHO) by a slightly vague statement regarding why you would need the tools.

If someone were to nominate you for a new run at RfA, what do you think you would do that you currently cannot? --Dweller (talk) 13:30, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing protected pages would be useful. The first thing I would do as an admin would be remove class="MainPageBG" from the Main page, because it may confuse editors studying the main page's markup, because that class does not exist. It's code cruft leftover from a bygone age. I would of course check the class again before removing it, to be sure it hasn't been repurposed.

There's also a formatting error on the Main page just above "Today's featured picture", where that section overlaps the bottom border of the section appearing above it. I would fix that too. Wikignome stuff.

I would be able to handle administrative maintenance issues directly and silently rather than find roundabout solutions. For example, editors requesting access to WP:AWB often had to wait several days before being approved because there wasn't an admin dedicated to monitoring and maintaining AWB's check page. So I placed an instruction on the page for editors to report to WP:AN if any request for approval aged over 24 hours, essentially delegating the chore to existing admins. If I was an admin, I would have simply filled the maintenance niche myself.

I do a lot of coaching, including admin coaching. I am proud to have coached and co-nominated The Rambling Man, AGK, and Dweller for adminship. Being an admin myself would enable me to convey a more complete perspective to my students.

If I were an admin, other administrators could contact me to assist with problems too big for them to handle by themselves. Also, I'm logged-in a lot, so the chances are high that I would be available should an emergency arise.

Browsing deleted pages would be useful for making proposals to Deletion Review. For example, many lists have been deleted due to an inappropriate conflict between categories and lists, and due to misinterpretation of the guideline "Avoid self-references" (which I've recently renamed to "Wikipedia:Self-references to avoid"). Guidelines concerning the purposes of lists have changed, and many list deletions no longer reflect this and should be reviewed. To reduce bandwidth (i.e., save reviewers' time), I would make proposals of batches of pages that share the same characteristics.

I move a lot of pages. I frequently come across pages that I'd move but can't; moves with a small problem that would otherwise be routine. Like pages that can't be moved because there is a redirect in the way which has more than one edit or which points somewhere else. Also, I occasionally find a category page that needs renaming, and I used to move these myself, but now adminship is required to do so.

Is that what you were looking for? The Transhumanist 18:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That'll do me fine; thanks. --Dweller (talk) 19:23, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Something is wrong with your mailbox, btw. --Dweller (talk) 20:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. -The Transhumanist 22:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check this out! I created Category:Userpages that need fixing so that people like you can check out userpages that need a little bit of a recharge. Have fun with it! --Gp75motorsports (talk) 16:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. AlasdairGreen decided to fix his own page. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 16:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer to work on the encyclopedia itself. I've tried to reduce the frustration of new users with respect to their user pages by providing easy-to-follow instructions on user page design. The Transhumanist 17:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Maybe I could create a template with a link to the design center? --Gp75motorsports (talk) 19:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Like this? -TT 19:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, The Transhumanist! You know, there's this really nice place to go if you want to design your own userpage. It's called the userpage design center. It's got thousands of possible combinations, and each one is super-easy to create. You ought to try it out.

but I need some help on the "If" for the username. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 20:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You need to replace the heading codes with bigs. To make the heading like this: heading text , so that you aren't inserting an edit button on people's talk pages. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 23:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I got my Portal moved to a "real" page and everything appears to be fine. Now, what links/redirects do I need to edit to include this new Portal? Is there a template or list to follow? No sense in building a portal if no one goes there and uses it right? Thanks again. Rocketmaniac (talk) 03:37, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice Job. Clean and crisp.

I moved things around to reduce white space and balance the columns. You might want to move the sections around some more to get the best placement/order of presentation.

Are purge buttons no longer needed? You might want to look into whether or not your portal needs one.

For links, you need to put a portal template on the corresponding article and category page. See other articles for how it's done there. Add your portal to the portal directory (accessible from Wikipedia:Portals), also add it to Portal:Portals, and to the shortcut directory (see the menu at the top of the Community Portal). Announce your new portal on the WP:CBB (in the section for new portals).

I hope that helps.

The Transhumanist 07:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please dont be over-bold in making template changes. The template you objected to, NoMoreLinks, survived an almost unanimous TfD in January.. I tried an alternative wording which I think meets your objections, and we can discuss further at Template talk:NoMoreLinks. As for the example you mentioned, I reverted your bold change at Genetics, but using the new template. I am not at all happy with the links at Life extension, and will comment at the talk page there on them. DGG (talk) 07:54, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I removed it from one location and then posted the discussion thread on WP:VPP. Rather than remove the template from further pages (as per your request), I've instead touched up the template to cover the issue of quantity. If there are only a few links on a page, we don't want to scare editors off from adding new links. And we shouldn't make preapproval mandatory, especially when there are only a few links to begin with. Though encouraging discussion is very appropriate. I hope you like it. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) (talk) 08:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your edits to list of basic design topics but question if they violate the "basic" focus of that article. What do you think? Some of the topics you have added seem a bit complicated and the list of topics has become rather broad. Regardless, thank you and cheers! —Parhamr 20:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, any subject introduction would define the subject, including mentioning its subfields. The problem is, in a hypertext medium, mentioning them includes linking to them. So there is some ambiguity between defining a subject and providing coverage of basic terms. If you can think of a solution, please let me know. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 20:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a graphic designer currently wrapping up my BFA, I might be far too close to the subject for neutrality. From my perspective, the design industry can be divided up into 2D (print communication), 3D (environmental and industrial design) and 4D (motion, interaction and experience design).

Also, designers are protective of their trades; while business and engineering are complementary trades, we assert autonomy from them. It looks like some of your edits have blurred the line. To an end-user of design, this is fine, but to a person who hopes to procure design, there are strong lines of distinction.

I will make some bold changes, possibly too aggressive. Feel free to revert any. —Parhamr 21:13, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a distinction should be made between the activity of design, and the field of design. Both are "topics". The Transhumanist 21:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I did my work. I think I really butchered it, but you may find something useful in the edit history. I primarily edited design professions and design activities. My writing about professions makes generalizations and is not yet in agreement with Wikipedia guidelines.

Have I only introduced confusion or are we headed in the right direction?

A fair amount of overlap exists between business, graphic design and engineering. Is a visual needed? A Venn diagram?

…I really shouldn't edit Wikipedia while sleep deprived. —Parhamr 22:22, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look. Auroranorth (!) 04:10, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job. I like it. I've touched it up a little. Be sure to watchlist it. It'll be interesting to see what other editors do to it over time. The Transhumanist 06:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I love your touch-ups - especially the lead! Is there anything else I need to do before the next assignment? Auroranorth (!) 07:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Explore the lists that support math, starting with List of mathematics topics - see how they are organized as a set and linked together via a TOC template. Compare that set to the set of health lists under construction, starting with Lists of health topics. The difference between the two sets is that the health set has only one base page (Lists of health topics), while the math set has two (Lists of mathematics topics and List of mathematics articles). It's ironic that the math set is less efficient.

I don't use the word "article" in list titles, because the inclusion of topic names (redlinks) usually precedes the creation of articles for them. The difference between a list of topics and a list of articles is that in topic lists redlinks are acceptable and expected, while a list of article implies that there shouldn't be redlinks. After all, a redlinked article isn't an article.

Note that the lead to Lists of health topics needs to be rewritten, so the current one is just temporary (copied from math). Also, I haven't added practitioners (doctors, dentists, etc.) to the template yet. I'm leaving people out of the alphabetical list.

Politics is broad enough to use the same list model as health.

The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 08:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have looked at these closely. I see that the List of basic mathematics topics (articles) is on separate pages (or some other maths one). Anything else? Auroranorth (!) 12:59, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Index templates The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 13:04, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's what they are. What is '(eom)' on my talk page? Why did you point me to Wikipedia:Index templates? Do I need to create a politics one? Auroranorth (!) 13:09, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

eom = "end of message"

an index template ties all the major lists for the subject together. Give it a go. 13:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Here's another:

Psychology
Outline Index Category Portal See also References
v t e

I assume you mean create one for politics. OK, I will do so. Auroranorth (!) 13:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Completed. See {{PoliticsTopicTOC}} and List of politics topics. Auroranorth (!) 13:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Click on the links of the other index templates, and see if you can spot something you missed.  :-) The Transhumanist 13:46, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I don't sound silly saying this, but 'I can't find it, I give up. Tell me!' Thanks, Auroranorth (!) 14:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The box is included at the top of basic, cat, and "lists". 14:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Gotcha, I think. Look now. Auroranorth (!) 14:10, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I didn't spot those. The centering should be built-in - see the health template. But the thing you missed is that the template should be placed on the category page, and at the top of the political science basic topics list (under the hatnote). The Transhumanist 14:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. What next? Auroranorth (!) 14:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're blazing a trail. I suggest you continue:

1. Add PoliticsTopicTOC to Wikipedia:Index templates - I'm surprised you missed this one.
2. Add a new third line to PoliticsTopicTOC, and place the 3 or 4 most major political subtopic lists on there (hint: List of political parties is one of them). (See GeographyTopicTOC and HealthTopicTOC)
3. Build Lists of politics topics (see Lists of mathematics topics and Lists of philosophy topics)
4. Build List of politics topics to be comprehensive (hint: after gathering everything you can possibly find from Wikipedia, you'll need to use the Web, and Google). Some things I've learned from trial and error:

   Leave people off of it

   Leave lists off of it (add those to Lists of politics topics or its lists of lists

   Wait until the last possible minute to split it up (it'll become harder to add articles gathered from Wikipedia to it once it is split up). See me before splitting it.

This assignment is larger in scale than your previous ones, so be patient, and keep plugging away at it. When it gets tedious, allocate part of your time to other activities so that you don't get burnt out. As you go, let me know what problems you run into, so we can deal with them most effectively, and also share as you go what you've learned by trial and error. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 20:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, starting from Nov 8, once you reach 500 edits in the main name space, you'll be eligible for AWB access again. To check it go to "my contributions", select the main namespace, click on the "500", and then take a look. If the history only goes back to Nov 8 or later, then you're ready. The Transhumanist 05:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding AWB, it goes back to September 24th, so I am obviously not ready yet. Auroranorth (!) 05:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, see User:Auroranorth/Workshop for updates on how I'm going. Auroranorth (!) 05:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, just wanted to leave a note of appreciation for the very useful stuff on your user page design section. I have mercilessly pillaged stuff from there, and from Phaedriel's user page, to revamp my own pages which I could not possibly have done without copying and pasting from you. So many thanks for providing such clear and helpful examples to those of us who can barely understand the code that underlies these pages! Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 20:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'm glad you found it helpful. The Transhumanist 21:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I warmly invite you to stand a third time for adminship. If you accept this invitation, I wish you success in the nomination. Having seen your response to the last RfA, either way, I know you'll benefit from the experience, however gruesome it may become.

Good luck. --Dweller 10:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just want to say, Good luck! :) Best, — Rudget _{contributions} 16:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The Transhumanist 21:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed what I think you pointed out... sorry, lil' woozy. After I closed I saw one other area with some possibility of confusion... but, NBD.. the sense of approval, I'm sure comes through.

Looking over the RfA again, I get the impression that perhaps you should, that is I suggest you minimize further exchanges. Regardless of how this goes for your aspirations, why don't you bend that energy into becoming a template guru? While not to your artsy tastes, the demonstrated mastery you have of HTML/XHTML could really be a benefit around here. Take a look at some of the template work David Kernow (talk · contribs · count) used to do, for Advanced primer... Look at the source code in HTML, and the resultant translation to what you already know will be a big edge.

Here's a little challenge for you, see 1632 series and the templates 32s, 32st, and esp 32TOC-beg and 32colors. Adjust those with your artsy sense and color knowledge for a nice pastel background and semi-prominent title boxes. Grantville Gazette V and Grantville Gazette XV are my test beds, so to speak, iirc, GG04 perhaps as well (or instead?) Anyway, the default colors need fixed up, and there is enough parserlogic in those to get your feet wet. Just reign in bright and think "understated and professional" <g> Good luck on the RfA. You seem to have stepped on some toes here and there. // FrankB 05:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The biggest mistake I made at my last RfA was not addressing opposers' concerns. Instead I argued. This time I'm inquiring and clarifying. While remaining civil. In addition to the feedback, I need to understand the opposers' criticisms. And they need to understand me. Neither of these things will happen if we don't communicate. One of the main objections presented was that "the very significant concerns from the previous nom have not been addressed." Well, it's time to address them. RfA is the place to do it, because that's what it's for, and because it serves as a record for easy reference next time. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 08:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your concern. And thank you for the heads up on the templates. I'll take a look. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 08:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I actually did read that. I was hoping for greater conciseness. Dlohcierekim 00:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "more concise"? Was there anything in my replies that you didn't understand? I'll be happy to clarify any points that you are unsure about. The Transhumanist 00:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Transhumanist. Please sum it up. Sometimes less is more. Dlohcierekim 14:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about the post you made concerning my not replying, when I had actually replied here? Anyhow, here's a nutshell version: Wikignoming protected pages, fix glitch on Main page, fill administrative niches, teaching from an admin perspective to students, deletion review proposals, moves over redirects, assisting other admins, etc. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 14:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Do you still disagree with the placement of the Wikipedia:Contents page and its 6 "Contents" subpages in portalspace; or can I mark that thread and its various incoming pointers as concluded, in favour of leaving them in portalspace? See also Wikipedia talk:Featured content#move to portal namespace.

Also, a question for you at your RfA :) -- Quiddity (talk) 07:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portal space is fine for the contents pages. But to lose search box functionality for lists of lists would be a shame. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 07:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read... I'm you on uppers! I got a kick out of that.  :-) The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 07:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, ditto.

Another question for you at RfA (the last, I promise ;) -- Quiddity (talk) 20:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would not like to join in the conversation. If somebody has a concern that they wish to raise with me, I would prefer it if they raised it on my talk page, as I don't want any of my answers interfering with the result of the discussion. I hope that my participation in your coaching program has not interfered with your RfA and if it has, I apologise. I'm going to ask on the RfA discussion page that everybody considers your overall performance and not just my coaching. Auroranorth (!) 10:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I can now edit in the project namespace! Auroranorth (!) 10:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Decided not to post a comment. Auroranorth (!) 11:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was a discussion about something you said, and what you meant by it. But don't worry about it. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 11:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw that - an editcountitis. Auroranorth (!) 12:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Waxing philosophically here, I wonder if the 500-edit requirement for WP:AWB promotes edit-countitis. I suppose if someone had 490 mainspace edits and seemed responsible, I would approve them. But where do you draw such a line?  :-) The edit-count, though arbitrary, does seem to provide a useful benchmark in this case. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 21:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TT. Unfortunately the time has come to finish my coaching. I can assure you there were many factors influencing this decision and it was not just the RfA which sparked it. However, the comments on your RfA were fuel for the fire. I was unaware this fire was already raging, however the time has come to move on. I hope we can still help each other in our editing pursuits, and I thank you most sincerely for aiding me into the Wikipedian community. I hope to see you around. Thanks again. Auroranorth (!) 05:39, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As you wish. If you need further help, just ask. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 06:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is telling that, if over a dozen different people over the course of two RFAs tell you that you are too formal and bureaucratic, you are unable to understand why, and require an explanation along with examples. It's a matter of attitude; and it's a fact of the 'pedia that not every effective editor (like you are) would make an effective admin. Recommended reading material on the subject is the page WP:PPP. >Radiant< 00:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are busy in real life, and may not be available right away, I've copied your reply to the RfA myself. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 02:25, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I've replied there. The Transhumanist 08:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 02:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, paradoxically, part of the problem is that you don't realize what the problem is. >Radiant< 16:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm about to disappear on my usual weekend cold-turkey from Wikipedia. I might be able to pop in occasionally, but I don't expect it.

I'm sorry your RfA has gone so badly. I don't mean the "score" - I wasn't sure it would be a success - but more that so many of the oppose !votes strike me as based on generalisms that are vague or nebulous, making it hard for you to learn from the experience.

I'll come back to this with fresh eyes next week and see if I can pick out more meaty themes.

However, it's undoubted that one bone of contention is the admin coaching and it's got me thinking. I have a suggestion. What you offer is arguably not admin coaching at all. You don't tell people, for example, when to block, or when to protect. More correctly, you help get people up to speed on policy, so they're better Wikipedians... and, incidentally, more fitting for RfA.

I would suggest you resign as an admin coach, sign up for adopting Wikipedians and rename the admin school "policy school" or something similar.

I doubt you'll like this suggestion, but quite irrespective of the popularity line, it's a better descriptor. And if you do this, I would suggest that we could test out the idea of putting the shebang into project space.

Have a think about it. And one more suggestion: ask some experienced users you trust to comment here on the idea before you weigh in with anything resembling yes/no/maybe reply.

"See" you Monday. Regards, --Dweller (talk) 12:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• While "admin school" or "policy school" can be a good idea at least in principle, it is easy to give people the wrong idea therein, or get them into overly strict habits, or cause people to attach more importance to rules-as-written than they should. I believe it would be best if such a "school" had the added input of multiple people, including people who come from a different angle than yourself. >Radiant< 16:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • True... and in Project space, that'd be a natural development. --Dweller (talk) 21:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dweller, it appears that you may have misunderstood somebody. The "ill conceived" admin school referred to in my previous RfAs was deleted at MfD, and it was burnt with fire. Any attempts at building a new admin school would likely be met with overwhelming opposition, something that took me totally by surprise when I created the original one, and which haunts me to this day.  :-) My advice: don't do it.

Immediately afterwards, I created the Virtual classroom (VC), which has two legitimate functions:

1. it is a general learning/teaching forum, with all of Wikipedia as its scope
2. it also serves as my admin coaching page -- all admin-coaches use coaching pages, and mine is just more elaborate than most.

The general scope of the VC is clearly stated at the top of its page. I chose the niche of advanced wiki-skills, because there are already 2 forums for helping beginners. The VC doesn't need a new name, it is about as generic as you can get, and a "policy school" would have a much narrower scope. Keep in mind that I don't teach much policy - all that would entail would be me repeating the policies, and that makes little sense. I teach how to get things done, which includes passing on many different approaches and styles.

As you've probably noticed, I take a new approach with each new coachee. That's to keep it interesting and to avoid repeating myself. It's as much a learning odyssey for me as it is for those whom I teach. It's one of the reasons I know so much about Wikipedia.

As far as I can tell, I teach my admin-coachees the same types of things as other admin coaches teach. We are after all, preparing our admin-coachees to become admins (that is, for RfA). For more details, see Wikipedia:Admin coaching.

I accept requests to coach from admin hopefuls and from those who want to generally improve. But I prefer intermediate students, because for me, it's fun to provide a springboard for them to become advanced. The most obvious place to acquire intermediate coachees is through the admin coaching department.

I believe that my being an admin coach is not a valid reason to oppose at an RfA. Besides, being an admin coach has a bearing on how good of an admin I will be, since one of the best learning methods is teaching. I've learned a great deal from my coachees. Also, I'm not hurting anyone, and I'm helping people. But if anyone at RfA wants to oppose me for this, that is their privelege. Anything can be used as the basis for opposes, including the nominee's philosophical positions and values. One shouldn't be intimidated by such objections - not all peer pressure is appropriate.

The Transhumanist (talk) 16:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've watchlisted Requests for adminship/The Transhumanist4. Additionally, I've used one of your menus! Thanks for that. I'm sorry if the tenor of some of my comments disadvantaged your RfA in anyway. I get irritated at the logic (or lack thereof) behind some of the opposes, and it especially burns me when people leave no comments except for 'No way jose!'. Good luck, and maybe at some point if you are willing I'll come to you for coaching :-P Avruch^Talk 02:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TT. Lots to think about in what you write above. This is just a quick note to indicate that I've read it, and also to clarify that my post was prompted by the RfA, but not in response to. Any changes I'm suggesting are irrelevant to the RfA process... and are intended to be for the good whether or not you ever run again and hence I was under no pressure or - far from it - intimidation. Anyway, like I say, I'll be back... --Dweller (talk) 15:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to RfA nominees -- that they shouldn't cowtow to inappropriate opposes. The objection based on me being an admin coach I definitely disagree with. The rest I'll do my best to accomodate. The Transhumanist (talk) 17:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus, look at this mess Category:Basic topic lists! Please deactivate the cats on these whilst they are in user-space. RfA votes have been lost on much less. Johnbod (talk) 18:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or alternatively, please could you "nowiki" the categories until you transfer them to mainspace. Thanks very much. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't catch that. Thanks for pointing that out. I'm on it. The Transhumanist (talk) 23:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Commented them out. The Transhumanist (talk) 02:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed a few more that were missed. —Moondyne 01:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The Transhumanist (talk) 01:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to inform you that I have closed your RfA as not demonstrating a consensus that you should be made an administrator at this time. I hope you won't be too disheartened and will take onboard the concerns raised by those opposing with a view to running again in the future. Best wishes, WjBscribe 16:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, mate. The Transhumanist (talk) 17:15, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a vote of 41/0/1. Please accept a slice of panettone as an expression of my gratitude. Feel free to help yourself to some chocolate zabaglione as well. I am humbled by the trust placed in me to use the tools wisely. Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 21:15, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain on the talk page exactly what you believe should be referenced? — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could I inquire why you chose to use this list to investigate WP:V, rather than just discussing your question on a talk page such as WT:WPM or WT:V? That might have reduced the possible tension in the situation. — Carl (CBM · talk) 14:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because the math list would make the best precedent for other topic lists to follow. Don't you agree? The Transhumanist (talk) 20:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Like you probably know, we don't really do precedent on Wikipedia; whatever happens to the math list is not a controlling factor for other lists. Going through a process to test a hypothesis is strongly discouraged. I think that a simple discussion on the featured list talk page would have sufficed to address the question you are trying to answer (and I don't know what that question is, so your choice of actions isn't helping get you that answer). — Carl (CBM · talk) 22:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The math list needs to meet FL criteria requirements, just like every featured list, and I have reason to believe that it does not. When I nommed another list at FLC, it was pointed out that having no sources was not acceptable. The controversial FLC nomination of the Math list was also mentioned. Upon checking the math list, I found it lacking in sources, and then checked the FL criteria. It appears it no longer meets FL criteria. But if you can show that it does meet the criteria, that's fine with me. The Transhumanist (talk) 23:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am a relatively new contributor to Wikipedia. Today, I found that the edits by User: 59.96.29.222 on the topic Chera dynasty is without any references and found that the person reverted the page to a revision with some absurd edits. I placed the {{primarysources}}, {{confusing}} templates on the article as the edits were not harmful but confusing. The User:59.96.29.222 reverted the page to his revision. How should I respond? Thank you. P|^|C (talk) 07:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The most direct approach would be to copy-edit the text yourself, and hunt down references for it.

If it is beyond your ability or you just don't have time, you could invoke WP:VER. That is one of Wikipedia's core content policies. It states that everything needs to be verifiable, and that anyone can remove unreferenced material. When doing so, it is a good idea to move unsourced text to the article's discussion page to talk over what to do with it. If I were you, I'd move just the absurd edits to the article's discussion page. Explain what you are doing (and why) in the edit summaries and on the discussion page, and cite the policy WP:VER. Also, inform the other user of WP:OWN.

It's important to remain civil, and not to bite the newcomer. You could post {{welcome-anon}} on his or her talk page, and encourage him or her to talk things out with you on the article's talk page. If the user persists in causing problems, you may find warning templates useful. See WP:WARN.

If after trying everything you can think of while still being nice to the person, and you continue having a problem with the person, see WP:AN, or come back to me, and I'll be glad to help. The Transhumanist 09:06, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your timely feedback and Thank you for your diligence. I'll gladly get back to you in case of any assistance. Cheers. P|^|C (talk) 09:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because of your participation in discussions relating to the "PSTS" model in the No original research article, I am notifying you that a request for arbitration has been opened here. I invite you to provide a statement encouraging the Arbcom to review this matter, so that we can settle it once and for all. COGDEN 00:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Art" is not the same as The arts''. I posted (the wrong) questions on the contents talk page. If you’re going hierarchical, the titles should be, “Culture and the arts.” :-) RichardF (talk) 02:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uhg. Already done. I wish you would have caught me an hour ago.  :-) Okay, here it goes again... The Transhumanist (talk) 02:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just got here, sorry. :-) RichardF (talk) 02:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to move on to creating the next megaportal. Maybe you could?  :-) How about Geography --> Geography and places ? I'll join in with another after I finish cleaning up Culture and the arts. The Transhumanist (talk) 02:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to add an image to a portion of a page that is part of a hide/show menu? I'd like to add a photo to the first portion of the menu of my userpage (to appear to the right of the bulleted list), but so far my attempts have not been successful. Am I doing something wrong, or is this the impossible dream? Horologium (talk) 22:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I placed a test picture in your "About me" section, and it works fine. Just replace the name of the pic with the one you want.

I hope that helps.

The Transhumanist 23:08, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This may be a browser issue (I am using Firefox 2.0.0.11) or perhaps a resolution issue (my display is 1280X1024), but when I show that section, the picture shows up at the bottom of the screen, partially obscured by the last of the menu bars (in fact, the menu bar runs right across my eyes, so I look like the before shot in an ad). I'll go ahead and swap in the photo I planned to use, but I'm not sure if it is going to work. Horologium (talk) 23:19, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it hangs off the bottom of the box, add some "<br>"s. The Transhumanist 23:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not in the box at all. It shows up behind the colored bar of the last menu. Horologium (talk) 23:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have confirmed that it is a problem with Firefox. The page displays as intended in IE. Horologium (talk) 23:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox generally has fewer problems displaying wikicode tha IE. Though I'd be surprised if there wasn't a code fix for this. The Transhumanist 02:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found a fix - it works on the left. You could also try enclosing it in a table, and then float the table. The Transhumanist 03:25, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) OK, the left-side fix works for now. I'll have to figure out how to insert it into a table, and see if floating it to the right prevents it from breaking the template. It's bizarre how it doesn't work on the right, only on the left, and the problem occurs only in Firefox. Thanks for your help! Horologium (talk) 03:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nesting a table worked. The Transhumanist 04:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! Horologium (talk) 04:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The floating table is exactly what I was looking for. Thank you for all of your work. Horologium (talk) 04:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Auroranorth (talk · contribs) is gone for 'rtv' - whatever that is. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 23:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably started over from scratch. Not a bad idea, actually. The Transhumanist (talk) 23:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does rtv mean 'request to vanish'? I'm guessing so. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 23:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Right to vanish". See WP:RTV. The Transhumanist (talk) 23:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 23:21, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See this. :-) RichardF (talk) 05:31, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

	<font=3> Thanks for your support, my request for adminship passed 62/0/0 yesterday! I want to thank Snowolf and Dincher for nominating me, those who updated the RfA tally, and everyone for their support and many kind words. I will do my best to use the new tools carefully and responsibly (and since you are reading this, I haven't yet deleted your talk page by accident!). Please let me know if there is anything I can do to be of assistance, and keep an eye out for a little green fish with a mop on the road to an even better encyclopedia. Thanks again and take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:26, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for helping me defend the Lord of Darkness article from deletion and for your contributions to the page. It hasn't been deleted yet and hopefully never will be but thank you for your support, you have been a great deal of help. Furthermore I have responded to your comments at Talk:Lord of Darkness. Illustrious One (Receive My Majesty)

Hey Transhumanist, I've started a major challenge with substantial reward on your Awards 4 U page. I'm offering barnstars for several feats related to combating vandalism Just giving you a heads up, as this challenge could be pretty big.

On an unrelated note, I almost wish you had a newsletter, as so much interesting stuff goes on in your sub-pages. :-P

Hope all goes well, --Sharkface217 23:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just put them in your watchlist. And by the way, check your control center. 08:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Check my control center? --Sharkface217 04:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See your "command page." -TT 06:18, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi! how did you make your vandalism space? X××x××pink×jellocreature××x××X (talk) 05:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I stole it. -TT 06:24, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha your funny! X××x××pink×jellocreature××x××X (talk) 06:37, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But it's true! Does that mean I'm truly funny? -TT 06:47, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

>

Hi, I'm setting up a shop called ChampionMart. We're currently looking for an assistant page designer. I was hoping you'd be interested. Thanks, --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 16:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. We also need a page redesign. Thanks. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 16:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How will this differ from Wikipedia:Reward board, Wikipedia:Bounty board, Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance), and the various Wikipedia:Requests pages? Just curious. The Transhumanist 18:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually an all-in-one. Not only do we do userpages, we also do free images, userscripts, userboxes, signatures, barnstars, and templates as well. We may expand. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 17:58, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll pass. But good luck. The Transhumanist 21:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For taking up the challenge and improving my command page, I, Sharkface217, hereby award you this Original Barnstar. Another feather in the Transhumanist cap, eh? :-P --Sharkface217 21:37, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A wikipedia project that serves as a place where users can get signatures, userboxes.... stuff like that, so they don't have to make it themselves or ask a specific user to do it. What do you think of that idea? RuneWiki⁷⁷⁷ 22:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This one sounds similar to the one you've suggested: Wikipedia:WikiProject User Page Help

The Transhumanist 22:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We've got libraries of userboxes. See: Wikipedia:Userboxes#Gallery.

For signatures, just find one you like, cut and paste it, and change the letters and links so it's you.

Please describe your project idea in more detail, so I can point you to any pages on Wikipedia that already exist for the intended purposes. The Transhumanist 22:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Trans Face! X××x××pink×jellocreature××x××X (talk) 01:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

X××x××pink×jellocreature××x××X (talk) awards you the unofficial funniness award!

Your page at User:Go for it!/table tests has a category in the article namespace. Any chance of removing it? Cheers. -- Alan Liefting-talk- 04:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's none on the page. It must be a template. What category is it in? The Transhumanist (talk) 07:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is in the Category:Philosophy portal. It is showing a category at the bottom of your user page. -- Alan Liefting-talk- 00:18, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's in some transcluded portal subpages. Probably a "noinclude" issue. I'll fix it. Thank you for the heads up. The Transhumanist (talk) 00:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blessed editing, and...

Happy Holidays from Marlith ^T/C Please feel free to contribute to Wikipedia:Song/The Twelve Days of Christmas
Credits: This card was inspired by Macy's123, assistant of V's Shop

Marlith ^T/C 23:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I think I am going to withdraw my request for now. I have a little too much on my hands right now. I am currently helping out Aang and I have also been adopted by User:The Placebo Effect. When my adoption ends I'll probably come for coaching. Thanks for asking though. I did not think anybody would answer my request. (By the way, nice user page.) Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 01:16, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The thing you are looking for is here. <DREAMAFTER> ^<TALK> 01:50, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The Transhumanist (talk) 05:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/F9T i think. Happy Holidays F9T 08:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]