My Helpme Requests My Sandbox My To Do
| This is a Wikipedia
user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pknkly. |
 |
Please look at Wikipedia_talk:Disambiguation#Categories. I am looking at some articles that I was trying to clean out of your cleanup list and ran into three that are now at issue.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 12:45, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
This was probably an erroneous tag before we had refined subcategory usage for WP:CHIBOTCATS. Many of the railroad cats had articles that were only slightly related to the project although we tagged them at first.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 04:10, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
- Could be a common problem with railroad articles.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 04:17, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I thought Indiana Territory was as much a part of the project as Illinois. Do you think I am stretching things? Maybe we don't have a category for these articles.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 05:58, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thought we were limiting scope to Chicago and Chicago metropolitan area. I've been deleting Chicago Project tags from articles that are outside of the counties given within the Chicago metropolitan area article. Yes, I think you are stretching. The active members (I think there might be seven with some super members - you) can't even keep up with the Chicago/Chicagoland scope much less Illinois and possible Indiana. I would stay focused on Chicago/Chicagoland and build a good foundation of well understood processes that are well documented (i.e., easily understood by the general membership) and followed. Once the current project tasks, that are within the Chicago/Chicagoland scope, are running smoothly we could collaborate with Illinois or Indiana Projects by helping them develop and document their processes. Thanks for asking my opinion. Pknkly ( talk) 06:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
No Mercy (2007) WP:CHIBOTCATS category
Category:Sports in Chicago, Illinois is a decent category for No Mercy (2007). Create a cook county category if necessary for suburban events. Anything at Toyota Park (Bridgeview) or Allstate Arena should be in our project. Just come up with a policy. Either include them in a Chicago cat or create a Cook County cat.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 14:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- Didn't see the relevance of including all productions at the entertainment venues unless they pass some sort of notability threshold. In my opinion,
No Mercy (2007) didn't pass my threshold. However, it seems to have passed yours. I don't see the need to bring all productions within the scope of our Project. For instance, do we really want Haunted Hollow or Winter Wonderland from
upcoming Toyota Park events? The threshold will always be subjective and so we will need to come up with a way to isolate the important ones from the frivolous. Hopefully editors will limit bringing all productions within the scope of our Project. My plans are to continue with documenting the category process ( at
Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories as it is now and then make changes. Test changes will be done along the way. So, I'll create a category
category:Entertainment events Chicago, Illinois and
category:Entertainment events in Chicago metro area, Illinois.
Pknkly (
talk) 15:41, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- If the event is notable enough for an article, we should probably tag it. No one else is going to watch the articles and it is the only way they will show up at
WP:CHIAA if anything is going on.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 16:01, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- That makes very good "Wiki sense". I'll hold onto what you just said and place into into a section within Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories that will give Chicago Project guidelines for categorization. Pknkly ( talk) 16:17, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- P.S. find a category name that other geographic areas are using and make the proper subcat. Either events or entertainment events I am not sure. Look around.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 16:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- If the event is notable enough for an article, we should probably tag it. No one else is going to watch the articles and it is the only way they will show up at
WP:CHIAA if anything is going on.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 16:01, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories is very detailed. It is taking me a while to grasp it all. What does the table on the right all mean.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 04:50, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- The table shows the namepace within which there are WikiProject Chicago pages that are within the scope of the project. The code (e.g., PSP001L) is used to represent "Main namespace List page that is within the scope of the Chicago Project". By using the code the need to repeatedly use the long term is omitted. Pknkly ( talk) 06:49, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- P.S. Some categories are template assigned. E.g., at
University of Chicago Band,
Template:Infobox college marching band adds the template-assigned
Category:University marching bands. I don't know if any Chicago Template assign cats.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 05:07, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- This page is taking me too long to figure out. I don't like pages that I can not figure out by a WP:LEAD and infobox. I am trying to wade through this, but it is counterintuitive and not like anything I have seen at any project. Are you laying the groundwork for a new categorization system?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 05:20, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hopefully by the end of the development there will be a more concise lead. I will try and make a very technical document be as intuitive as the other technical documents (e.g.,
Wikipedia:Disambiguation or
Wikipedia:Categorization ). Right now I'm going through a discovery process and dummping what informatin I find into the article. I hope others will help. The article is going to be very long. I plan to include a description of each type of category that is within the scope of the Project, how they are created, and how they are maintained. I'm documenting how things are done now with suggestions for improvements where there is a gap in an implied process or category structure.
Pknkly (
talk) 06:49, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- Keep up the good work.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 06:59, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hopefully by the end of the development there will be a more concise lead. I will try and make a very technical document be as intuitive as the other technical documents (e.g.,
Wikipedia:Disambiguation or
Wikipedia:Categorization ). Right now I'm going through a discovery process and dummping what informatin I find into the article. I hope others will help. The article is going to be very long. I plan to include a description of each type of category that is within the scope of the Project, how they are created, and how they are maintained. I'm documenting how things are done now with suggestions for improvements where there is a gap in an implied process or category structure.
Pknkly (
talk) 06:49, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- It appears that you are like me, and have a love for precision. However, I'd reccomend dropping all the "PSC", "PSP" 00XX stuff - most people will find that hard to remember and later in the document won't be able to follow. Once you distill it, I think you guys will be in a very good position to keep on top of your assessments. By the way, Indiana's default-importance run is done - see 993 edits. (They only categorized into mid or low, everything else was left alone). Let me know if you want to try this for CHICAGO. You guys have 11,035 articles of unknown importance - I'm sure Xenobot would lighten the load. – xeno talk 16:41, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- Appreciate your comments. Please see Improving readability. I recognize the need to improve readablity but don't know how to get there. Pknkly ( talk) 07:52, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to help with editing this page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories, because there are a few things that may need to be clarified. I think the dichotomy between the categories for main namespace and the project space, which is almost always related to "talk" pages only needs to be emphasized. In addition, maybe we should create: Category:Chicago Wikipedia administration? Projects that use this type of administration are listed in: Category:Wikipedia administration by topic, and may serve a useful purpose in following their style of organization. -- Funandtrvl ( talk) 16:40, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for offer and suggestion. I moved your suggestions to
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chicago/Categories where we can pick up the discussion.
Pknkly (
talk) 17:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- FYI latest tagging run is done. See User talk:Xeno#Chicago tagging [1] for some notes. – xeno talk 02:22, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- Have you seen Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_October_22#Category:WikiProject_Chicago_content_categories?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 02:55, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
From the page at Wikipedia talk:What is an article? it looks as though you initiated the development of a page about the definition of an "article". The page evolved into a very well written document. With it and the wp:categorization document I built up a good Wiki vocabulary. However, everywhere I look, "article" is grossly misused, relative to the definition given in "What is an article?". That misuse is spread far and wide by developers. To me it seems that the misuse is so great that it renders the wp:What is an article? page obsolete. I wish that was not the case. Here is an example: Category:Template-Class articles - there isn't a single article, infered or otherwise, in this category list, but its title says there are. I go crazy when the title says "article" and its filled with talk pages, images, projects, portals, or even talk pages. It seems to me most people have started to use "article" to mean any namespace basic page and sometimes it is even a talk page. In one document I used the word "page" and it baffled people to such a degree that it as changed to article! Do you see the same thing? Should anything be done about it? If this has been brought up before, please direct me to the page. Somebody said it was brought up before but could not remember where. Pknkly ( talk) 11:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- This type of thing used to bug the hell out of me, but not so much anymore. Main namespace pages already are denoted by an 'article' tab. Not sure if much more than that is needed. -- mav ( talk) 02:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
look at to do 75.21.192.115 ( talk) 02:34, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the support. I can't take credit for starting the project, just for reviving it. It is now active and with you and a few more could be a thriving project. Keep up your efforts.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 04:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Do you follow the discussions at WP:CHIAA? I haven't seen your commentary on any of them. I don't look so closely, but the project is trying to get WP:CHIFTD over the hump and the current nomination ( Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/McDonald's Cycle Center/archive2) could use some commentary.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 03:52, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- No I haven't and as a project member I should - so I will. I'll start my Wiki sessions with a glipse at WP:CHIAA. My strength or preference is not copy edit stuff. Nevertheless, I'lll try and contribute some time toward moving WP:CHIFTD forward. I'm totally immersed in category related activity. Its what interestes me. My obsession with category tasks has been so intense that I'm even dropped Chicago off my watchlist! Good thing other project members are on it. Pknkly ( talk) 16:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for visiting the current WP:CHIFTD candidate. It is not necessary to put the general Chicago category on an article that is in one of the subcats. In fact, articles in the general catagory should have their tags swapped out for specific subcats whenever possible. Feel free to make suggestions on this FAC candidate at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/McDonald's Cycle Center/archive2.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 18:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Tony this goes back to documenting the Chicago Project categorization scheme. Unless its documented it like trying to guess what needs to be done. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories/Categories for encyclopedic articles#Using the categories and edit as you would like to see it. Its a simply article without code. In my opinion, having all encyclopedic articles within either of two main encyclopedic categories and then also placing the article within more specific categories makes sense. It builds that Core Scheme I'm trying to develop. If you don't develop and document a Core Scheme with a structure the categories just become a dumping ground for articles. If a person doesn't know what subcategory an editor may have put an article, they could always go to category:Chicago, Illinois or Category:Chicago metropolitan area and search within those main categories for their article. That is the value. If you disagree with anything within Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories/Categories for encyclopedic articles, please change it. I really don't want to guess anymore. Pknkly ( talk) 19:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- It is contrary to common practice and accepted procedure to have an article both in a category and one of its subcats. All I am saying is that it is perceived as wrong to both a category and subcats on an article. An article in both
Category:Transportation in Chicago, Illinois and
Category:Millennium Park needn't be in the general category.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 19:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- That common practice seems to be based on a lack of understanding of distinguished categories. That lack of understanding seems to lead to the perception of something being wrong when a page is within both a category and a subcategory that is within the category. Please see my support for use of
distinguished categories.
Pknkly (
talk) 07:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
- I stand corrected in general. However, I see little reason for McDonald's Cycle Center to belong to Category:Chicago, Illinois. Category:Transportation in Chicago, Illinois is a distinguished category of Category:Transportation in Illinois, I guess since not every city is going to have a category, however, it is not a distinguished category of Category:Chicago, Illinois.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 07:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
- That common practice seems to be based on a lack of understanding of distinguished categories. That lack of understanding seems to lead to the perception of something being wrong when a page is within both a category and a subcategory that is within the category. Please see my support for use of
distinguished categories.
Pknkly (
talk) 07:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
- It is contrary to common practice and accepted procedure to have an article both in a category and one of its subcats. All I am saying is that it is perceived as wrong to both a category and subcats on an article. An article in both
Category:Transportation in Chicago, Illinois and
Category:Millennium Park needn't be in the general category.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 19:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
As I look at Category:Cycling in Chicago, Illinois, I am curious about why each article should also be in Category:Chicago, Illinois just because it may be in this category.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 15:52, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Please see Categorization scheme section where I would like to have all the discussions about the scheme in case others become interested. The scheme also depends on the use of the admin category. Please review and comment on that section as well. Pknkly ( talk) 19:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
See User talk:Wuhwuzdat#Chicago tagging - thanks. – xeno talk 13:45, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Can you visit User_talk:Wuhwuzdat#Chicago_tagging.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 19:39, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 14:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
|
You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here! |
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Category:WikiProject Chicago content categories has been nominated for discussion
Category:WikiProject Chicago content categories, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 12:01, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
My Helpme Requests My Sandbox My To Do
| This is a Wikipedia
user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pknkly. |
|
Please look at Wikipedia_talk:Disambiguation#Categories. I am looking at some articles that I was trying to clean out of your cleanup list and ran into three that are now at issue.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 12:45, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
This was probably an erroneous tag before we had refined subcategory usage for WP:CHIBOTCATS. Many of the railroad cats had articles that were only slightly related to the project although we tagged them at first.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 04:10, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
- Could be a common problem with railroad articles.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 04:17, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I thought Indiana Territory was as much a part of the project as Illinois. Do you think I am stretching things? Maybe we don't have a category for these articles.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 05:58, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thought we were limiting scope to Chicago and Chicago metropolitan area. I've been deleting Chicago Project tags from articles that are outside of the counties given within the Chicago metropolitan area article. Yes, I think you are stretching. The active members (I think there might be seven with some super members - you) can't even keep up with the Chicago/Chicagoland scope much less Illinois and possible Indiana. I would stay focused on Chicago/Chicagoland and build a good foundation of well understood processes that are well documented (i.e., easily understood by the general membership) and followed. Once the current project tasks, that are within the Chicago/Chicagoland scope, are running smoothly we could collaborate with Illinois or Indiana Projects by helping them develop and document their processes. Thanks for asking my opinion. Pknkly ( talk) 06:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
No Mercy (2007) WP:CHIBOTCATS category
Category:Sports in Chicago, Illinois is a decent category for No Mercy (2007). Create a cook county category if necessary for suburban events. Anything at Toyota Park (Bridgeview) or Allstate Arena should be in our project. Just come up with a policy. Either include them in a Chicago cat or create a Cook County cat.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 14:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- Didn't see the relevance of including all productions at the entertainment venues unless they pass some sort of notability threshold. In my opinion,
No Mercy (2007) didn't pass my threshold. However, it seems to have passed yours. I don't see the need to bring all productions within the scope of our Project. For instance, do we really want Haunted Hollow or Winter Wonderland from
upcoming Toyota Park events? The threshold will always be subjective and so we will need to come up with a way to isolate the important ones from the frivolous. Hopefully editors will limit bringing all productions within the scope of our Project. My plans are to continue with documenting the category process ( at
Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories as it is now and then make changes. Test changes will be done along the way. So, I'll create a category
category:Entertainment events Chicago, Illinois and
category:Entertainment events in Chicago metro area, Illinois.
Pknkly (
talk) 15:41, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- If the event is notable enough for an article, we should probably tag it. No one else is going to watch the articles and it is the only way they will show up at
WP:CHIAA if anything is going on.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 16:01, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- That makes very good "Wiki sense". I'll hold onto what you just said and place into into a section within Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories that will give Chicago Project guidelines for categorization. Pknkly ( talk) 16:17, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- P.S. find a category name that other geographic areas are using and make the proper subcat. Either events or entertainment events I am not sure. Look around.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 16:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- If the event is notable enough for an article, we should probably tag it. No one else is going to watch the articles and it is the only way they will show up at
WP:CHIAA if anything is going on.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 16:01, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories is very detailed. It is taking me a while to grasp it all. What does the table on the right all mean.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 04:50, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- The table shows the namepace within which there are WikiProject Chicago pages that are within the scope of the project. The code (e.g., PSP001L) is used to represent "Main namespace List page that is within the scope of the Chicago Project". By using the code the need to repeatedly use the long term is omitted. Pknkly ( talk) 06:49, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- P.S. Some categories are template assigned. E.g., at
University of Chicago Band,
Template:Infobox college marching band adds the template-assigned
Category:University marching bands. I don't know if any Chicago Template assign cats.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 05:07, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- This page is taking me too long to figure out. I don't like pages that I can not figure out by a WP:LEAD and infobox. I am trying to wade through this, but it is counterintuitive and not like anything I have seen at any project. Are you laying the groundwork for a new categorization system?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 05:20, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hopefully by the end of the development there will be a more concise lead. I will try and make a very technical document be as intuitive as the other technical documents (e.g.,
Wikipedia:Disambiguation or
Wikipedia:Categorization ). Right now I'm going through a discovery process and dummping what informatin I find into the article. I hope others will help. The article is going to be very long. I plan to include a description of each type of category that is within the scope of the Project, how they are created, and how they are maintained. I'm documenting how things are done now with suggestions for improvements where there is a gap in an implied process or category structure.
Pknkly (
talk) 06:49, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- Keep up the good work.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 06:59, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hopefully by the end of the development there will be a more concise lead. I will try and make a very technical document be as intuitive as the other technical documents (e.g.,
Wikipedia:Disambiguation or
Wikipedia:Categorization ). Right now I'm going through a discovery process and dummping what informatin I find into the article. I hope others will help. The article is going to be very long. I plan to include a description of each type of category that is within the scope of the Project, how they are created, and how they are maintained. I'm documenting how things are done now with suggestions for improvements where there is a gap in an implied process or category structure.
Pknkly (
talk) 06:49, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- It appears that you are like me, and have a love for precision. However, I'd reccomend dropping all the "PSC", "PSP" 00XX stuff - most people will find that hard to remember and later in the document won't be able to follow. Once you distill it, I think you guys will be in a very good position to keep on top of your assessments. By the way, Indiana's default-importance run is done - see 993 edits. (They only categorized into mid or low, everything else was left alone). Let me know if you want to try this for CHICAGO. You guys have 11,035 articles of unknown importance - I'm sure Xenobot would lighten the load. – xeno talk 16:41, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- Appreciate your comments. Please see Improving readability. I recognize the need to improve readablity but don't know how to get there. Pknkly ( talk) 07:52, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to help with editing this page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories, because there are a few things that may need to be clarified. I think the dichotomy between the categories for main namespace and the project space, which is almost always related to "talk" pages only needs to be emphasized. In addition, maybe we should create: Category:Chicago Wikipedia administration? Projects that use this type of administration are listed in: Category:Wikipedia administration by topic, and may serve a useful purpose in following their style of organization. -- Funandtrvl ( talk) 16:40, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for offer and suggestion. I moved your suggestions to
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chicago/Categories where we can pick up the discussion.
Pknkly (
talk) 17:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- FYI latest tagging run is done. See User talk:Xeno#Chicago tagging [1] for some notes. – xeno talk 02:22, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- Have you seen Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_October_22#Category:WikiProject_Chicago_content_categories?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 02:55, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
From the page at Wikipedia talk:What is an article? it looks as though you initiated the development of a page about the definition of an "article". The page evolved into a very well written document. With it and the wp:categorization document I built up a good Wiki vocabulary. However, everywhere I look, "article" is grossly misused, relative to the definition given in "What is an article?". That misuse is spread far and wide by developers. To me it seems that the misuse is so great that it renders the wp:What is an article? page obsolete. I wish that was not the case. Here is an example: Category:Template-Class articles - there isn't a single article, infered or otherwise, in this category list, but its title says there are. I go crazy when the title says "article" and its filled with talk pages, images, projects, portals, or even talk pages. It seems to me most people have started to use "article" to mean any namespace basic page and sometimes it is even a talk page. In one document I used the word "page" and it baffled people to such a degree that it as changed to article! Do you see the same thing? Should anything be done about it? If this has been brought up before, please direct me to the page. Somebody said it was brought up before but could not remember where. Pknkly ( talk) 11:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- This type of thing used to bug the hell out of me, but not so much anymore. Main namespace pages already are denoted by an 'article' tab. Not sure if much more than that is needed. -- mav ( talk) 02:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
look at to do 75.21.192.115 ( talk) 02:34, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the support. I can't take credit for starting the project, just for reviving it. It is now active and with you and a few more could be a thriving project. Keep up your efforts.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 04:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Do you follow the discussions at WP:CHIAA? I haven't seen your commentary on any of them. I don't look so closely, but the project is trying to get WP:CHIFTD over the hump and the current nomination ( Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/McDonald's Cycle Center/archive2) could use some commentary.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 03:52, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- No I haven't and as a project member I should - so I will. I'll start my Wiki sessions with a glipse at WP:CHIAA. My strength or preference is not copy edit stuff. Nevertheless, I'lll try and contribute some time toward moving WP:CHIFTD forward. I'm totally immersed in category related activity. Its what interestes me. My obsession with category tasks has been so intense that I'm even dropped Chicago off my watchlist! Good thing other project members are on it. Pknkly ( talk) 16:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for visiting the current WP:CHIFTD candidate. It is not necessary to put the general Chicago category on an article that is in one of the subcats. In fact, articles in the general catagory should have their tags swapped out for specific subcats whenever possible. Feel free to make suggestions on this FAC candidate at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/McDonald's Cycle Center/archive2.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 18:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Tony this goes back to documenting the Chicago Project categorization scheme. Unless its documented it like trying to guess what needs to be done. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories/Categories for encyclopedic articles#Using the categories and edit as you would like to see it. Its a simply article without code. In my opinion, having all encyclopedic articles within either of two main encyclopedic categories and then also placing the article within more specific categories makes sense. It builds that Core Scheme I'm trying to develop. If you don't develop and document a Core Scheme with a structure the categories just become a dumping ground for articles. If a person doesn't know what subcategory an editor may have put an article, they could always go to category:Chicago, Illinois or Category:Chicago metropolitan area and search within those main categories for their article. That is the value. If you disagree with anything within Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Categories/Categories for encyclopedic articles, please change it. I really don't want to guess anymore. Pknkly ( talk) 19:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- It is contrary to common practice and accepted procedure to have an article both in a category and one of its subcats. All I am saying is that it is perceived as wrong to both a category and subcats on an article. An article in both
Category:Transportation in Chicago, Illinois and
Category:Millennium Park needn't be in the general category.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 19:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- That common practice seems to be based on a lack of understanding of distinguished categories. That lack of understanding seems to lead to the perception of something being wrong when a page is within both a category and a subcategory that is within the category. Please see my support for use of
distinguished categories.
Pknkly (
talk) 07:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
- I stand corrected in general. However, I see little reason for McDonald's Cycle Center to belong to Category:Chicago, Illinois. Category:Transportation in Chicago, Illinois is a distinguished category of Category:Transportation in Illinois, I guess since not every city is going to have a category, however, it is not a distinguished category of Category:Chicago, Illinois.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 07:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
- That common practice seems to be based on a lack of understanding of distinguished categories. That lack of understanding seems to lead to the perception of something being wrong when a page is within both a category and a subcategory that is within the category. Please see my support for use of
distinguished categories.
Pknkly (
talk) 07:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
- It is contrary to common practice and accepted procedure to have an article both in a category and one of its subcats. All I am saying is that it is perceived as wrong to both a category and subcats on an article. An article in both
Category:Transportation in Chicago, Illinois and
Category:Millennium Park needn't be in the general category.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 19:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
As I look at Category:Cycling in Chicago, Illinois, I am curious about why each article should also be in Category:Chicago, Illinois just because it may be in this category.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 15:52, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Please see Categorization scheme section where I would like to have all the discussions about the scheme in case others become interested. The scheme also depends on the use of the admin category. Please review and comment on that section as well. Pknkly ( talk) 19:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
See User talk:Wuhwuzdat#Chicago tagging - thanks. – xeno talk 13:45, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Can you visit User_talk:Wuhwuzdat#Chicago_tagging.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 19:39, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 14:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
|
|
You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here! |
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Category:WikiProject Chicago content categories has been nominated for discussion
Category:WikiProject Chicago content categories, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 12:01, 7 December 2019 (UTC)