User talk:Joe Quick/Archive 2

Joe Quick

Current talk page

Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4, Archive 5

Upload dropdowns

To Stephen Ewen:

With the drop down menus, is it possible to code them so that when a person chooses an option, a second drop down appears with options for refining their choice. I know this is common elsewhere, but I don't know if it is possible with wikimedia.

• A person might choose Public Domain and then be prompted to specify the details.
• Or maybe that person chooses CC-BY-SA and is then prompted to choose the version.
• Or chooses Bypermission and then specifies whether the permission allows or does not allow reuse.

This should reduce the clutter significantly if it is possible.

If this process is automated, I think we can combine the several versions of each CC license into a single template, similar to what I did with the PD template. We could do this even without a sophisticated drop down system, of course.

BTW, the drop down menu in its current state forces me to scroll over to use it. That's probably not a good thing. --Joe Quick (Talk) 01:45, 5 May 2007 (CDT)

I am going to forward this to a tech who may know. It'd be plum sharp if possible. I do know that they are doing NO new custom coding now until after the new version of MediaWiki (in release candidate 2 status) comes out. Stephen Ewen 01:51, 5 May 2007 (CDT)

Sounds good. Happy Cinco de Mayo. --Joe Quick (Talk) 01:56, 5 May 2007 (CDT)

Y tu! Stephen Ewen 02:10, 5 May 2007 (CDT)

I have not followed this discussion but the checklist badly needs drop down functionality too. Let me know how this progresses from a mediawiki perspective. Is this even possible or a pipe dream? Chris Day (talk) 15:36, 7 May 2007 (CDT)

It looks like it is at least possible: http://jspwiki.org/wiki/BrushedTemplateDropDownMenu but I can't follow that stuff well enough to know how much work it would take to modify that system for implementation here. --Joe Quick (Talk) 17:11, 7 May 2007 (CDT)

Image_talk:FranzBoas-Eskimo.jpg/Permission

Just have me unlock it when you need to add more. Stephen Ewen 14:03, 7 May 2007 (CDT)

Thanks. Do you think it makes any sense to start collecting hard copies of these official permission pages in some central location, or are scanned versions enough? --Joe Quick (Talk) 14:32, 7 May 2007 (CDT)

Scanned images for CZ. I'd keep the hardcopies for your records as the uploader. Stephen Ewen 19:05, 7 May 2007 (CDT)

Okay. Maybe we should at least make it a practice to categorize the scanned images so that there aren't legal documents spread out all over the place? I think we're doing a good job of following the rules on these but should someone disagree, we're going to want to be able to say, "Look here." --Joe Quick (Talk) 19:15, 7 May 2007 (CDT)

Reply

User_talk:Stephen_Ewen#Yet_another_image_question --- Stephen Ewen 11:45, 12 May 2007 (CDT)

Reply #2 Stephen Ewen 12:41, 12 May 2007 (CDT)

Hi Joe: Just a copy of a message I left on Stephen's Talk page: You are safe to use this image. Joel Emmons Whitley died circa 1870 according to Craig's Daguerreian Registry, which is an excellent, documented, research site for collectors of daguerrotypes and early photography. By the by, the image is from CDV (Carte de Visite), which was produced in multiple copies, so the LOC and other images may indeed derive from completely different originals (both copies). Cheers! Russell Potter 20:01, 12 May 2007 (CDT)

Greetings from DH

Joe, thanks for your kind note. No, I don't know anything about Little Crow, sorry. Found the dates via google, you should confirm with bona fide sources. For what it's worth, I would say that your article (i.e., from an encyclopedia standpoint) seems to be broader than the subject of Little Crow alone. Maybe you'll decide to turn some of it into a piece about the tribe, history, practices, whatever. Just a thought. Take care, David Hoffman 21:19, 12 May 2007 (CDT)

Category:All media

Check it out. ---Stephen Ewen 04:26, 20 May 2007 (CDT)

Information template

Hi Joe! Thanks for the template -- it sure looks a lot less cumbersome. I will experience with it for my next uploads and will let you know what I think. Thanks again! Hayford Peirce 15:40, 21 May 2007 (CDT)

The template works v. nicely -- I have copied it onto my User page and can copy it from there as needed. Thanks! Hayford Peirce 17:49, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Image "Department

I was thinking about the "Permissions Department" idea and thought, what about just a Media "Department"? It would help with all things media related, even requests for finding media, not just securing permissions. Stephen Ewen 17:46, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Good idea. That's what I had in mind. Have we come to any consensus (or at least a decision) on the issue of asking permission for copyright-expired images from archives? --Joe Quick (Talk) 20:15, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

I'd like to negotiate agreements with them. ;-) ---Stephen Ewen 21:07, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Media Assets Workgroup

See CZ:Media Assets Workgroup. Stephen Ewen 05:11, 26 May 2007 (CDT)

Cool. My last class is on Tuesday afternoon, so I'll get to work on this in the coming week. --Joe Quick (Talk) 13:03, 26 May 2007 (CDT)

Tecum Umam

Hi Joe,

I've been looking around for articles which are at the stage when they might be ready to be nominated for Approval. Your entry on Tecum Umam looks close to me! If you agree, would you let me know? I'll try to help locate an Editor who might nominate it. Cheers, Russell Potter 13:14, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

Wiki Research

Thanks for your completed survey. James Sutton 08:46, 26 June 2007 (CDT)

Thanks

It was nice to see some appreciation, especially as I have had to read copious quantities of science articles to get a grip on the topic. It was too important to leave to authors, though: we saw the results previously. I just accept it as one of the trials of life! Do comment on the Talk page: constructive debate is always welcome. --Martin Baldwin-Edwards 19:28, 10 August 2007 (CDT)

Pant(r)ies and butts

..at butler Oh, I can't believe I did that! Holy psychological typos, Batman! LMAO when I saw your note! Aleta Curry 06:23, 12 August 2007 (CDT)

adding to the workgroup page

When you get a moment, could you add any additional "to do" headings to the anthro workgroup page - particularly in sociology/classical anthropology? I want to get this list in order - format it and make a decent welcome page (unless of course you find the time to do that...............)!

Many thanks in advance!

Lee R. Berger 14:55, 12 September 2007 (CDT)

Many thanks

Many thanks Joe - Anthro is a lonely place right now - I intend to change that soon - I have written every editor and author and am enlisting colleagues and students and hopefully we'll get going soon. My strategy now is to work on creating all developed articles in the critical list. I'm going to rely on the wiki format/theory/philosophy to bring these to "approved" status.

Lee R. Berger 15:57, 12 September 2007 (CDT)

Cool. I think we got off to a pretty good start on Anthropology but progress got bogged down and then ground to a halt when we had to deal with the history of anthropology. My memory wasn't fresh enough and I had to divert my attention to my undergraduate thesis. With some fresh blood, I think we can get that one to approved status pretty quickly. And if we can get one article approved, then I think others will follow quickly.

I doubt I'll be able to help you very much with articles related to physical or biological anthro but I've been working on recruiting people to help me with the archaeology and ethnography of Mesoamerica, which is what I know best. I feel like our workgroup is finally starting to get going after a couple of false starts. Let's hope the trend continues!--Joe Quick (Talk) 16:09, 12 September 2007 (CDT)

workgroup

Getting there! Maybe some sexy boxes? (we have to look like we know what we are doing don't we?) Also - what about some pics on this page that might attract authors - I have GREAT Masaai!

Lee R. Berger 11:31, 13 September 2007 (CDT)

Can't go wrong with Masaai. What about a pic of someone wearing a kula ring? (Joking, of course, but a fellow student once asked me what a kula ring looks like :-)) I'll see what I can do about some boxes and tables. --Joe Quick (Talk) 11:47, 13 September 2007 (CDT)

• Don't ask or you will recieve - I have! the boxes are looking good!

Lee R. Berger 12:31, 13 September 2007 (CDT)

Even better!

Lee R. Berger 12:37, 13 September 2007 (CDT)

Thanks. Those tables took me a long time to figure out. I say thank goodness for my generation - we learned to use computers by screwing up until we got it right and sometimes that's the only way to finally get it... --Joe Quick (Talk)

You biscuit! (believe it or not - that's a compliment in South Africa!)

Lee R. Berger 12:57, 13 September 2007 (CDT)

I believe it. Biscuits (all types except sea-) are delicious! I can only hope that one day you'll call me a cucumber. ;-) --Joe Quick (Talk) 13:03, 13 September 2007 (CDT)

Workgroup welcome

can we move towards a neutral welcome note? Edit mine as you see fit please.

Lee R. Berger 10:52, 14 September 2007 (CDT)

Hey! I liked your pic! I was just trying to add a pic of tools near tools - please leave it! I think it would look rather good to have a series of pics on the right of most of the major headings.

Lee R. Berger 15:05, 14 September 2007 (CDT)

I just moved it down to space things out a little better. :-) --Joe Quick (Talk) 15:07, 14 September 2007 (CDT)

Homes for subsections

i just made the following edits:

I moved Template:Anthro subsection-Archeology to CZ:Anthropology Workgroup/Archeology since this seems to be more intuitive. i made the following edits on the home page to reflect this move. Chris Day (talk) 13:21, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

Thanks. I didn't realize you could include normal pages that way. That makes a lot more sense. We'll probably need to move them to something just slightly less intuitive, because I expect CZ:Anthropology Workgroup/Archeology to eventually be a homepage for a sub-workgroup. I'll think about it after I finish some other experiments. --Joe Quick (Talk) 13:30, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

That's a good point. I'll leave it up to you what you do now, i just wanted to point you can use normal pages. Chris Day (talk) 14:22, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

Very elegant solution. Good job. Chris Day (talk) 15:19, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

What happened!

Why did these section get nominated for "speedy" delete? Is that a bug or what? I anc't see in the history where this is done?

Lee R. Berger 14:38, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

I'm about to fix it. Another five minutes or so. --Joe Quick (Talk) 14:40, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

I see - silly me as I was trying to edit it started - I thought it was a virus as everytime I checked one more went away - ignore me in the future! By the way - added excavation.

Lee R. Berger 14:56, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

No virus ;-) I was trying to finish as quickly as possible so as to confuse people as little as possible, but I guess Saturday (afternoon here) was bad timing. --Joe Quick (Talk) 15:36, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

Question

Hi, I am new on here.

Is there official CZ criteria to draft a new article here? I want to draft one, but I am not sure it would be relevant to draft it here.

Thanks for your helps. Nicolas Tollet 15:25, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

Colors

Larry's given us teh go-ahed for an Alpha test of the color concept on the workgroup page so - Fire Away!

Lee R. Berger 10:47, 16 September 2007 (CDT)

Okay, the first step is to create Metadata pages for all of the current articles in the anthro workgroup. And it feels a little irresponsible to create Metadata pages without also creating the rest of the subpages, so this could be a big job. After that, I'll get started on the workgroup page. --Joe Quick (Talk) 10:54, 16 September 2007 (CDT)

Template:PI?

Joe, if I may ask, what are you making? --Robert W King 18:09, 16 September 2007 (CDT)

It's a color-coding system for CZ:Anthropology Workgroup It's used on the priority list to indicate the status of the articles on the list. The relevant conversation is all over the place but most of it is here. --Joe Quick (Talk) 18:20, 16 September 2007 (CDT)

Brilliant idea. At a glance one can see the progress of articles in the workgroup. Chris Day (talk) 21:00, 16 September 2007 (CDT)

Thanks. Most of the credit goes to Lee. I think the colors could use an overhaul - there are just too many different statuses to deal with. That's a pretty simple adjustment to make though, when we work out what we want. --Joe Quick (Talk) 21:23, 16 September 2007 (CDT)

In biology we often use so-called pseudo colouring. Basically it follows the light spectrum. I've seen it used in weather maps too. It works prety well. You can see an example here. Blue is low concentration and red is high concentration. Since no link is red (by default) then in this scheme an approved would be blue. Here is another example Chris Day (talk) 22:00, 16 September 2007 (CDT)

That might be the way to go. I was avoiding blue and violet on purpose because they would be confused with normal links. It's currently supposed to imitate a stop light, but the effect doesn't work very well because there are so many different article levels that must be included. --Joe Quick (Talk) 22:37, 16 September 2007 (CDT)

Thisis a good site to check for colour blindness compatability. vischeck. For example, you can check out your current link colors and determine if those with colourblindness will be able to distinguish between the shades you have chosen. See the example I ran through just now.

Joe - the test is really looking good! Do you need me to go through where there are "blue" links and add "subpages"?

Lee R. Berger 00:26, 17 September 2007 (CDT)

Thanks

For that. :-) --Russ McGinn 09:25, 24 September 2007 (CDT)

Have you noted?

Give yourself a pat on the back - geology has adopted your invention on their workgroup page..............:-)

Good news

2 pieces of good news! I will try to deal with the first soon, and the second is up to you! --Martin Baldwin-Edwards 18:53, 28 September 2007 (CDT)

Interesting glitch

When I was amalgamting all the history articles under Paleoanthropology into  Paleoanthropology in Africa (history) - it comes out red, but when you click on the link it goes to the right page? Is it something to do with the (history)?

Lee R. Berger 08:41, 29 September 2007 (CDT)

The metadata page had the article listed as externally sourced (status 4). I have the template set to show those articles as red links because, ideally, we want to rewrite them. I've adjusted the article's status. --Joe Quick (Talk) 10:39, 29 September 2007 (CDT)

Where's Waldo?

On my draft page: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Hayford_Peirce/Draft_for_Waldo_Peirce It's coming along, and ought to be ready in a couple of days.... Hayford Peirce 16:28, 6 October 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, I get confused about the two pages also -- for a while I thought I had *lost* the damn draft article! I spent the winter of '47-'48 in Key West but at age 8 never went to Sloppy Joes, although I'm sure that if Waldo had been around he could have taken me in. Take a look at my last comment on User:Stephen Ewen's talk page for another interesting item.... Hayford Peirce 17:59, 6 October 2007 (CDT)

Colored links

I have not "looked under the hood" of your cool colored link system, but is this what you've done? http://arnomane.wordpress.com/2007/06/24/mediawiki-tricks-1-custom-link-colors/  —Stephen Ewen (Talk) 01:15, 7 October 2007 (CDT)

Pretty close. It uses the same basic idea but ours is a little smarter. It calls on the metadata template to determine the color and the icon rather than just assigning the same color to any article that exists.--Joe Quick (Talk) 11:13, 7 October 2007 (CDT)

Robert Space Thorpe

Hello, Joe, thanks for explaining that. But miraculously, someone else has just fixed it. It's nice to be whole again... Robert Thorpe 15:54, 9 October 2007 (CDT)