For what it's worth WikiProject Austin seems to me to be a bit of a joke at this point. It strikes me that almost nobody sees themselves as actively involved with the project at all. --Mcorazao (talk) 16:58, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
1. Isn't the User:TheAustinMan actively involved in the project?
2. I added the Austin portal tag, and I linked to the WikiProject from the portal so more people will know about it
3. There's also the possibility of turning the Austin WikiProject into a task force of WikiProject Texas.
4. I had expressed the idea of starting task forces of other areas (San Antonio, El Paso) in the Texas WikiProject. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:01, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
TheAustinMan was, though recently he's been quiet. I hope that I didn't scare him away. I scolded him a little for arbitrarily nominating articles for GA without doing the appropriate homework. I don't know about changing Austin to task force. To me it is an important area (I'm biased because I live here) so I decided to make it a personal pet project. Though I believe a WProject is warranted, without significant involvement it is rather pointless.
I have seen the proposals for SA and EP task forces. I hope there is enough interest to make a go of these. BTW, regarding the El Paso WP, it might be worthwhile making it an EP-Juarez-Southern New Mexico project. You might attract more people that way (including people with knowledge of EP who might find the increased scope more worthy of their involvement). --Mcorazao (talk) 17:23, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
1. Ah, based on his edit history, his last edit was on February 13. Anyway I also notified him about the plane crash article. Hopefully he'll help with the article 2. According to El Paso metropolitan area the only county within the El Paso MSA is El Paso county in Texas. Maybe in 2010 the US gov't could redefine a New Mexico county into the MSA - that could help things. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)'
Well, what does the El Paso MSA have to do with anything? The OMB creates its statistical definitions according to some very specific constraints which are valuable for some things and completely meaningless for others. In general it is better to cast a wider net in defining WikiProjects and task forces so as to not arbitrarily exclude related topics (or inadvertently offend and exclude editors who might be able to help). The scope of a WikiProject doesn't have to have anything to do with the scope of any particular article or definitions used by any particular organization, government or otherwise. --Mcorazao (talk) 18:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What official definitions do is that they provide a solid justification for the scope of a project. That way project members and the outside users have a clear understanding of what the scope is. I used the MSA as the scope for the Detroit task force when I proposed it, and so the scope is the MSA. Also, I set the MSA as the scope for Austin, and Houston uses its MSA as its scope too.
It is true that projects need to cast a large net so that they get large numbers of members. This is why, in the case of Austin, I began adding articles from surrounding counties to the project. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
I most definitely agree with the idea of being reasonably clear about the scope of a WikiProject. And to the extent that an MSA or CSA definition provides a reasonable delineation then that is an easy way to define project scope. So, for example, defining the scope of WP:WikiProject Chicago as something beyond the Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City CSA is probably pointless since this encompasses such a huge area (actually the WikiProject doesn't provide a formal boundary for its scope but still ...). But if there is a useful scoping that extends beyond the MSA/CSA definitions I don't think that we should stick to those scopes simply because agreeing on a scope might be more contentious. In general even if the scope of a WikiProject is not always clear it is not the end of the world. For example, if WP:WikiProject Spain decides to devote some energy to Andorra-related articles because they are relevant to Spanish culture, that is not unreasonable even if these topics strictly speaking fall outside the scope of the project's stated coverage. By the same token, if the project decides to say Andorra is part of its scope, there's nothing wrong with that either. If the project decided to include France, that would be unreasonable.
I would like to take the time to personally thank you for correctly marking all of the Northern Virginia articles with the Task force's banner. You have been a great help! --Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 20:04, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am working on it too, But every bit helps :)! --Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 20:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Febrero 2010
You may or may not be aware of this, but when uploading a photo to Wikipedia, craptastic things happen to its clarity, sharpness and colouring. Saturday I uploaded a night-time photo of Tex Children's Hospital and was unhappy with the crappy artifacts etc that Wiki put in the photo....This evening I tried to upload a new version in an attempt to compensate for some of the wikicrap...but unfortunately I think its worse than the original.... So anyhow, I'm polling on which photo is less craptastic here. If you wouldn't mind giving me your opinion on them, it would be much appreciated. Scroll down to view the original and final versions. Regards, --nsaum75¡שיחת! 01:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I live in Canada, not Ethiopia. But I have relatives and they could e-mail me a pic! 10soccerkid10 (talk) 21:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Funny, I they havent responded my email so i think the internet cut off...... sorry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 10soccerkid10 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Help: arbitration/blocking
Just FYI, I understand if you don't have time to deal with this. I am continuing to develop the article which sadly means the history split situation gets uglier. Hopefully one of the administrators can find time to help at some point (it's not the end of the world if the history never gets merged — I guess).
. At present the first has my edits whereas the second has Polaron's fork and edits from at least one other user.
Just FYI, I had filed an incident and User:EdJohnston has essentially implied that he refuses to do anything unless Polaron agrees to it (don't know if there is a backstory there). User:Lvklock has objected to EdJohnston's statements but otherwise nothing has happened. I mention this only because I didn't want to ununwittingly put you in conflict with another admin.
FYI: SarekOfVulcan chose to sidestep policy and close the discussion (and delete a lot of content that I've added). I'm trying to use WP:Requested moves but I don't know what is going to happen.
Hello. I closed the discussion of File:ETIHADHQ.jpg. Based on the comments and my understanding - see Commons:Deletion requests/Image:UAE Embassy Moscow.jpg (and others like it) where I nominated images like this for deletion on Commons and was found to be mistaken - this image would be considered free on Commons. I think you're perfectly safe to move it there if you like. Angus McLellan(Talk) 23:02, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed new map style for List of Diplomatic missions by Country articles
As a regular contributor to these articles your views are sought about a new map style for the List of Diplomatic missions by Country articles.
Currently we are using maps which show which countries host a diplomatic mission of a given country (please see as an example the map we use for List of diplomatic missions of Spain). These maps however do not show where the missions are actually located (which may be a few for those countries with large networks of consulates). And the title of this ("Diplomatic missions of Spain") and other similar maps could be more accurate
The map style I propose instead indicates the cities that host a mission of a given country. As an example, I have produced this map for List of diplomatic missions of Singapore.
It is not difficult to make these maps. They are based on the third map below (accessible at [File:Blank map cities shaded.PNG] on Wikipedia Commons), in which I have indicated all the world capitals and other major cities where diplomatic missions are located. The circles representing cities are not visible because they are slightly different shade of grey, but all you have to do is colour each circle with a distinctive colour, and in no time you can have a more accurate and easier to read map.
I think that this approach is more appropriate for this and other categories of articles which concern cities (such as
List of cities that failed in their bids to host the Olympics
etc.), rather than countries.
Please add your views to this new proposal, including whether you like it, see problems, or see ways how it could be improved here
Could you advise if I have handled the discussion with Alinor appropriately? I must admit I lost my temper with him over his tendentious insistence that we include the option for including accreditations and honorary consulates (never a good thing to do).
His proposals seem to have stalled discussion. If we can agree to a simple map format (without those 100 issues he has raised), we can get this matter resolved, and actually do some work! Kransky (talk) 08:55, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I hear you're good at cartoon articles. Got any suggestions for Jeff Bennett, currently at afd? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:40, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Refimprove tag
Hi, and thanks for the message. With sixty-something refs, it wasn't at all clear to me where the extra refs (if any) might be needed in the Ryanair article. It's much better (in those circumstances) to bung in "citation needed", or whatever, tags where necessary, so I'm glad that you're doing that. Refimprove is rather a blunt instrument (but I did refrain from zapping the tag when I was looking at Lufthansa - only thirty-something there!) On the other hand, is it really necessary to provide a ref for every single sentence in every article, I wonder?
Talking of the Ryanair article, I spent a bit of time trying to fill up the acres of empty space to the left of the lengthy infobox. It looks very unprofessional (and I'm sure that you weren't responsible). There seems to be an html "div" tag that might work - it seems to do so with Lufthansa - but I don't have time to work out how to use it on Ryanair now as it's past my bedtime - could you fix it? BTW, I have no interest in airlines, but WP has an easier-to-use list of destinations than the Ryanair website. And I flew Lufthansa a few weeks ago, so that was a good article to check for differences. Best. --GuillaumeTell 00:51, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]