|
[[es:Wikipedia:Café (propuestas)]]
<div align="center" style="border: 1px solid #000; background-color: #ccf">
The '''proposals''' section of the [[Wikipedia:village pump|village pump]] is used to discuss new ideas and proposal that are not policy related (see [[Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)]] for that).
Please sign and date your post (by typing <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> or clicking the signature icon in the edit toolbar)[[Template:Villagepump|.]]
<big>
'''[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:Village pump (proposals)|action=edit§ion=new}} Start a new discussion in the proposals section]'''
</big>
</div>
{{Villagepumppages}}
== [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive|Proposals archive]] ==
Discussions older than 7 days (date of last made comment) are moved [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive|here]]. These discussions will be kept archived for 7 more days. During this period the discussion can be moved to a relevant talk page if appropriate. After 7 days the discussion will be permanently removed.
== Harry Potter in WP ==
I think it is quite clear that [[Pottermania]] has gripped many users, as is evident from the number of articles on the [[Harry Potter]] series. The coverage of this topic is not comprehensive; it is excessive. Counting the articles [[:Category:Harry Potter]] and its subcategories, and roughly estimating the number that are in more than one category, I would suggest that there are about 250 to 300 articles on the subject, including several on characters who have never actually appeared in the book, but have only been spoken about. Worse yet, many are full of nothing more than speculation (see, for instance, [[Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince]]).
As, of course, mere complaining would not be welcome, I would like to propose a solution to the problem. I hope, firstly, that the fans of this series who have contributed articles on the subject do not take this as an attack on them. Rather, it is only an attempt to improve article quality and standards. I propose, then, that a majority of these articles be redirected to the broader, main articles. The significant subjects (the books, movies, principal characters, and perhaps other important topics others may care to suggest) would have their own articles; all others would redirect to the appropriate pages, into which the material would be incorporated. We would not have such things as a page for each spell, plant, beast, or magazine that appears in the series. -- [[User:Lord Emsworth|Emsworth]] 20:58, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
:Seems modest compared with the documentaion of [[British Rail]] [[boggy]] numbers since [[1835]].--[[User:Irate|Jirate]] 21:04, 2005 Feb 27 (UTC)
::I think that 'boggy' is a cross between B.R. and H.P... [[User:Mel Etitis|Mel Etitis (<font color="green">Μελ Ετητης</font>)]] 23:51, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
:So what? As long as it's accurate. There's plenty of room for it. Maybe some articles should be consolidated, but otherwise I don't think this is a problem. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 21:56, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
::One certainly does not advocate the deletion of the content. Rather, consolidation is in order. To give an example, there is no need for separate articles for [[Quidditch]] and [[Rules of Quidditch]]. A [[List of characters in the Harry Potter series]] or some other suitably named article should cover a majority of the cases in question. -- [[User:Lord Emsworth|Emsworth]] 23:39, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hear! Hear! When you consider the howls of 'not notable' that greet the creation of an article on someone who has 'only' published a book or two, or affected hundreds or thousands of people by being an inspirational teacher, this sort of nonsense is truly offensive (well, it's the howls of 'not notable' that are offensive, in fact, but there seems to be nothing that can be done about the hordes of editors who are appalled at the idea that someone else might be the subject of an article and not them). The notion of 'accuracy' is also largely empty; how can one be ''accurate'' about a character that doesn't even exist in the books? Here (and elsewhere) this needs a firm but fair (and consistent) hand. [[User:Mel Etitis|Mel Etitis (<font color="green">Μελ Ετητης</font>)]] 23:51, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Consolidation is an '''excellent idea.''' HP fans might take a cue from what's been done with [[Atlas Shrugged]], which ''also'' has legions of rabid fans, but (fortunately) has been whittled down to a few large articles, rather than zillions of short ones. (There's also a section-by-section analysis, but on Wikibooks, not WP.) [[User:JosephBarillari|jdb ❋]] ([[User_talk:JosephBarillari|talk]]) 02:35, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
:No need to consolidate - wp is not paper. [[User:The Recycling Troll|The Recycling Troll]] 10:14, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Consolidation is an excellent idea in many cases such as this. I say this not because we need to conserve pages (I am a follower of ''Wikipedia is not paper'' and largely an inclusionist), but because it's good article organization and helps people that are genuinely interested in the topic explore small bits of related info together rather than jumping around. It also avoids repetition of context and assumptions. Subjects requiring more explanation can be briefly explained and linked. A good example is ''[[The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time characters]]''. Indeed, consolidation might be useful outside the context of fiction articles, such as consolidating a number of stubs on 17th-century mathematicians or former presidents of Rwanda. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 11:14, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:There is a difference, though. Someone with enough knowledge, resources, or time to invesitgate could expand an article on [[Grégoire Kayibanda]], [[President of Rwanda]], [[1962]] - [[1973]]. Consolidating the presidents into a general [[Presidents of Rwanda]] article and redirecting Kayibanda to it could discourage someone from making these edits. Compare this to [[Godric's Hollow]], a bit of ''Potter'' ephemera that cannot be expanded beyond fanfiction or speculation, regardless on the amount of time spent on it. Here, a redirect to [[Placenames in the Harry Potter universe]] or something like it seems appropriate. Should [[J. K. Rowling]] provide more information on it at a later time, then maybe it should get its own article. [[User:Cmprince|Cmprince]] 20:29, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== Other Wikipedia languages are impossible to find! ==
Hi,
I suggest that you make it possible to find other Wikipedia languages from the main page. I knew it existed, but had a heck of a time finding it!
Thanks for the good work,
Chris
:There's an icon on the top right of the Main Page and all of the languages listed at the bottom of the page. I can't imagine it being any easier to find without disrupting the primary function of the English Wikipedia Main Page (that function, well, being the Main Page of the English Wikipedia). [[User:Cigarette|Cigarette]] 14:32, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Not only that, but http://www.wikipedia.org is purely concerned with helping you navigate your way to the language edition you want, so if you recommend Wikipedia to anyone who might be interested in more than one version, you can give them this address. As for finding other languages from the Main Page of the English Wikipedia, as has been said above, it couldn't be much easier. If you had a "heck of a time finding it", you may wish to switch your computer's monitor on. — [[User:Trilobite|Trilobite]] [[User_talk:Trilobite|(Talk)]] 23:37, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Hm,... I guess you're right. You see, the german main page has all languages listed on the left. So where do I look for it in the english page? On the left :-)! I find this a lot more "visible"! On a page which is so crowded with text I scroll to the very bottom, expecting to at least find other main sites down there (on the english site). I didn't find it, of course (yes, my monitor is small).
And by the way - where's the link to www.wikipedia.org ? It should be at the bottom as well - or on the very top. Just like any home page (main page).
Chris
== Word Dictionary ==
When studing a new subject like life and health insurance i find there is a whole aray of new volabulary. My thought would be able to list each new word in a formated screen and it search out the difination so One could study a sheet of defind words. This would be most helpful to the student in all grades and walke of life.
:I'm not sure quite what you have in mind, but it sounds more like something for [[Wiktionary]] than for Wikipedia. -- [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 20:24, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
::I belive he is referring to a glossary abaut a particular subject. Yes, pheraps more appropiate to [[Wiktionary]]. [[User:AnyFile|AnyFile]] 15:26, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This ''can'' be done in Wikipedia. It already is. For example, see the article on [[Hostile_takeover#Tactics_against_hostile_takeover|Hostile takeovers]] in which there is a long list of terms. Just do the same thing in the [[Insurance]] article. --[[User:Munchkinguy|Munchkinguy]] 20:20, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Modular electronics diagrams|Modular electronics diagrams]] ==
I've been using a web program called [http://www.qsl.net/wd9eyb/klunky/framed.html klunky schematic editor] to draw [[User:Omegatron/Gallery|electronics diagrams]] for the WP. It just puts a bunch of components in square blocks together into a table. Sometimes I edit the screenshots afterwards for prettiness, but often just leave them the way they are and add text. A while ago I thought "we could just upload the individual blocks to the <s>wikipedia</s> commons itself and then make tables on the fly", but my initial experiment didn't work.
1. Duh. I just had extra whitespace in it. It works fine:
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td align="center">R<sub>1</sub></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td>[[Image:conn14.png]]</td>
<td>[[Image:R13.png]]</td>
<td>[[Image:conn34.png]]</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="right">V<sub>1</sub></td>
<td>[[Image:Vs42.png]]</td>
<td align="right">R<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>[[Image:R24.png]]</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td>[[Image:conn12.png]]</td>
<td>[[Image:conn13.png]]</td>
<td>[[Image:conn23.png]]</td>
</tr>
</table>
(That's not a single image:)
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td align="center">R<sub>1</sub></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td>[[Image:conn14.png]]</td>
<td>[[Image:R13.png]]</td>
<td>[[Image:conn34.png]]</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="right">V<sub>1</sub></td>
<td>[[Image:Vs42.png]]</td>
<td align="right">R<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>[[Image:R24.png]]</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td>[[Image:conn12.png]]</td>
<td>[[Image:conn13.png]]</td>
<td>[[Image:conn23.png]]</td>
</tr>
</table>
2. I just got the official word from the author a few days ago that he considers the program public ___domain, so there is definitely no problem with this.
===[[Pro]]s and [[con]]s===
*Advantages
**Modularity - easily fixed and changed and created
**Could be used by other diagrams, like [[Sokolsky_Opening|chess boards]]. (I saw a chess diagram and thought "Hey! How did they get it to work???" leading to the current revelation of having stupid whitespace in it.)
**Can use the individual circuit elements in each individual article
*Disadvantages
**Some diagrams don't fit the square block mentality that well, either wasting space or being completely "un-blockable", but we can always just revert to hand-drawn diagrams for those.
**Marking up images can become complicated. Not sure if things like → are sufficiently cross-browser compatible.
===Questions===
# Should we even do this?
# Should we use the default images? (See [[User:Omegatron#Modified_version_of_Klunky|my page]] for info about a slightly expanded version I created)
#* Should we use the default image size or make bigger ones? They are slightly on the small size on my high-res screen, but not bad at all.
#* Anti-aliased?
# Should we port the editor to the wikipedia as well?
# Images should be renamed. All should have the same, short prefix to keep them from cluttering up the image space and should follow a logical pattern for "port" numbering.
This won't work if browsers have their fonts set on "huge", but maybe some css can set fixed font pt sizes? But it might have its uses. Yet another reason to have a [[Wikipedia:Proposal_for_intuitive_table_editor_and_namespace|separate table namespace]]... - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 02:03, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
=== Better examples ===
Some more advanced examples:
{| border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"
| || || [[Image:ES_term_S.png]] || C
|-
| || ||[[Image:ES_cIs_NS.png]] || αi<sub>E</sub>
|-
| align="right" | B || [[Image:ES_term_E.png]] || [[Image:ES_wire_NSW.png]]
|-
| || align="right" | i<sub>E</sub> ↓ || [[Image:ES_diode_NS.png]] || I<sub>s</sub>/α
|-
| || || [[Image:ES_term_N.png]] || E
|}
{| border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"
| align="right" | B || [[Image:ES_term_E.png]] || [[Image:ES_wire_SW.png]] || || [[Image:ES_wire_ES.png]] || [[Image:ES_term_W.png]] || C
|-
| || align="right" | i<sub>B</sub> ↓|| [[Image:ES_diode_NS.png]] || || [[Image:ES_cIs_NS.png]] || βi<sub>B</sub>
|-
| || || [[Image:ES_wire_NE.png]] || [[Image:ES_wire_ESW.png]] || [[Image:ES_wire_NW.png]]
|-
| || || || [[Image:ES_term_N.png]] || E
|}
=== Comments ===
'''I added informal voting [[Wikipedia:Modular_electronics_schematics#Informal_voting|to the project page]]. Please vote on whether you like the idea or not.''' I haven't even made up my own mind yet. :-) - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 16:30, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
I like this idea. There was an electronic experiment set made by the Japanese company Gakken (学研) in the late 1970s that used this idea. That toy was a board with dozens of bricks each contains a electronic component (resistor, transistor, capicitor ...) with metal pins on two or more sides of the brick. When you insert the bricks to the board it forms a working circuit. The board contains batteries and an IC amplifier. That toy was fun. -- [[User:Toytoy|Toytoy]] 03:35, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
: The Gakken toy: http://www.ipv6style.jp/jp/apps/20031029/images/1.jpg . This set has been modified. You can see 7 original dark green bricks on top (jump wires, switch, jump wires and a diode). For more information: http://www.ipv6style.jp/en/apps/20031029/index.shtml . A patent lasts only 17 years then, so we can safely implement it on the Internet. -- [[User:Toytoy|Toytoy]] 03:42, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
:: They are still selling it! http://shop.gakken.co.jp/otonanokagaku/block.html Using bricks to create simple circuit diagrams is really a great idea. I suggest that we imitate the design of Gakken. -- [[User:Toytoy|Toytoy]] 03:47, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
:::This is to make schematic diagrams, not block toys. The blocks already exist; we just have to decide if we want to use them. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 04:16, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
Hey this is pretty cool. I saw this same concept earlier on [[Template:Football kit]]. This would be very useful for making simple circuits that don't warrant the effort of making an actual diagram. —[[User:Jleedev|Josh Lee]] 01:52, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
:On the other hand, there are currently about 300 images that would need to be uploaded (and renamed consistently). :-) Not exactly simple. So we should do it only if it will be worth it. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 05:44, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
I think we need to come up with some solution for schematics. This one is probably easier to implement than a full blown SVG rendering engine. It's also readily extensible. There are too many cases where I've been too lazy to create a schematic. I would definately use it if it was available and it's not too painful. We can collaborate on naming... [[User:Msiddalingaiah|Madhu]] 20:06, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Check out [[Wikipedia:Modular electronics diagrams]] for my current naming scheme idea.
:If we ported the editor it would not be painful, but typing in tables by hand sort of is. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 20:56, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
I agree that we need to come up with a way to make editable schematics. On some of my pages I tried to upload the .dia source to the images, but Dia sucks in a lot of ways. Then Wikipedia stopped letting me do these uploads. I was going to object that this Klunky tool would generate really bulky schematics, with little to no ability to name components.... but then I saw your examples. They're pretty good! I'm amazed you can do things like surround portions of the design with colored boxes.
: '''You can't.''' Everything I've made up until now is screenshots that I manipulated afterwards. Only the three examples above use the new idea. We could probably use table borders to do something similar with the modular ones, though. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]]
I would still prefer something like an SVG renderer in Wikipedia. Many technical things require line drawings that are not circuit diagrams. I wonder how many Wikipedia pages would actually be helped by this tool. Also, this Klunky tool would need some standardized way to add to the tile set. If I don't have the font you used, or if my drawing tool antialiases a different way, how do I make my tiles compatible with yours?
:Yes, SVG rendering with electronic component templates would definitely be better.
:This method uses whatever font is in your browser. All text is editable by anyone. No antialiasing to worry about. We are just taking pre-made images and putting them in a table. (And making new ones when we need something that doesn't already exist.) - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]]
:But it looks like [[m:SVG image support|SVG image support]] is in the far-off future, though... - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 02:31, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
But it looks cool. Do you even need Wikipedia to change anything to use it? It would appear you could just take the table Klunky generates and drop it into a wikipedia page. Maybe stick a note on it telling later editors how to stuff it back into Klunky for editing.
[[User:Iain.mcclatchie|Iain McClatchie]] 08:22, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Yes, we would just have to upload the images according to a standardized naming scheme (see above) and start making tables. An intuitive editor would be nicer, but maybe we could make the klunky program into a wikicode outputter, so you could download it only if you want and then copy and paste? This would also fit in well with a [[Wikipedia:Proposal_for_intuitive_table_editor_and_namespace|separate table namespace]]. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 23:36, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)
Not bad, but the image components need to be transparent. [[User:Dysprosia|Dysprosia]] 04:04, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Yeah. Good point. I've noticed diagrams with transparent backgrounds look bad in frames, though. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 04:50, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
I have never used Klunky but the diagrams [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Omegatron/Gallery] look good, especially the one for the 741 op amp with the colour dotted rectangles. So Klunky would get my vote, just so long as it does not become mandatory on Wiki and other graphics progs can still be used. One fear about Klunky, being block oriented, is lack of flexibilty which can make it difficult to keep schematics in 'data flow'. Some graphics packages like Word Draw, Visio and AutoCad (lite) give more flexibility and resolution which is useful, for example when you need circuit symbols and general drawing on the same image. Also, there are many archive schematics around in Protel and it is good for doing complex circuits. - [[User:CPES|CPES]] 21:56, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Well my diagrams so far are 90% klunky and 10% post-processing. The "coloured" dotted rectangles were added in afterwards, for instance. The schematic drawing packages are fine also for making "rasterized" images, but this is about uploading each block individually so we can edit them on the fly from within wikipedia. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 02:31, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
== Sources Revealed: bibliography and footnotes ==
I think it would be beneficial if contributors were able to supply their sources through a footnote/bibliography feature. This would provide a natural link to off-line resources and allow contributors to reference coryrighted material, providing a scholarly legitimacy that wikipedia is sometimes accused of lacking. It would also aid fellow wikipedians in further research, editing, and contibuting to articles.
-- The bibliograpghy/footnote feature could be removed from the text for the printed wikipedia
:See [[Wikipedia:cite sources]]. -- [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 18:02, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)
== Image ALT text ==
The article on Australia has a couple of images with captions that include wikified links. The generated ALT text is the caption text, excluding the text contained within anchor tags ("[John Howard], the [Prime Minister of Australia]" comes out as ", the "). Surely it would be better to include the anchor text, and just exluded the anchor tags within the ALT text? [[User:Josh Parris|Josh Parris]] 01:24, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== Uncategoriced images ==
Now, we are using the category system to know the licence of the images. A page of "Uncategoriced images" would let us find the images without licence. [[User:Llull|Llull]] 21:07, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:The trouble being that unless you got a bot to do this, it would be necessary to find all the images without a licence so as to add them to the category. Something is being done about such images at [[WP:PUI]], as and when people come across them. You can also add <nowiki>{{unverified}}</nowiki> and <nowiki>{{unknown}}</nowiki> to a picture with no source or licensing information to flag it up as such. — [[User:Trilobite|Trilobite]] [[User_talk:Trilobite|(Talk)]] 23:45, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
::[[Wikipedia:Untagged images]] is where the action is on this task. We queary every so often for untagged images, and then tag them.
== Adding stub templates? ==
How do you create a stub template? I want to add a template for pharmaceutical or drug releated stubs. [[User:Googuse|googuse]] 07:24, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)
:In the search box, type in the name of the stub you want, preceded by <code>Template:</code>. I suggest <code>[[Template:Pharma-stub]]</code> would be appropriate. There, paste this in:
:<code><nowiki>{{subst:metastub | article=[[pharmacology]]-related article | id=pharmastub | category=Pharmacology stubs}}</nowiki></code>
:Creating this would require creating the [[:Category:Pharmacology stubs]] page, which would need doing, considering the breadth of pharmacology. (I presume, by the way, that pharmacology is the appropriate area.) You could also follow the procedure at [[Template talk:MetaPicstub]] to create a stub notice with a picture in it. When the template is created, use {{pharma-stub}} to place it in articles. It would also be worth listing it at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types]]. If you need any more help, drop me a line. [[User:Smoddy|Smoddy]] [[User talk:Smoddy|(t)]] [[Special:Emailuser/Smoddy|(e)]] 14:49, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
::Please check with [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Criteria]] first - there are some guidelines for creating stub templates now in place (to stop categories overlapping, for example). It is quite likely that any pharmacology stub would overlap greatly with [[Template: treatment-stub]], for medical treatments and drugs, which was recently created. A separate [[Template: Drug-stub]] was debated but not created, after it was discovered that too few stub articles were currently listed for it to reach the guideline threshold for creation. (Actually, if you're keen on making new stub templates, it would be good to join in at [[WP:WSS]] anyway). Oh, and please ''do not'' use [[Template talk:MetaPicstub]] - it is being phased out as it puts too much strain on the servers (100 stub templates use it, and each of them is on 100 articles, so it's basically being used in 10,000 places on Wikipedia!) [[User:Grutness| Grutness]]|<sup>[[User_talk:Grutness|hello?]]</sup> [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 10:59, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
==WikiGalleries==
I had a thought. With the new gallery syntax from MediaWiki 4, it has become very easy to create pages of images. These can be very useful to illustrate certain subjects where pictures can say as much as words, but where it is far harder to fit an adequate number of images into the text. An example of this would be [[Ancient Greece]], but I am sure that many more could also be made. I guess this could be a use of the Commons, but I would consider it more of an encyclopedic thing, rather than being resources. [[User:Smoddy|Smoddy]] [[User talk:Smoddy|(t)]] [[Special:Emailuser/Smoddy|(e)]] 19:24, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:I'd rather have large galleries on the commons. Articles should have images, but not be overloaded with images. -- [[User:Chris 73|Chris 73]] [[User talk:Chris 73|Talk]] 05:30, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)
== Aquasport history project under boating? ==
As a member of the online forum www.classicaquasport.com I will be coordinating an effort to reconstruct the history of this well-known manufacturer of recreational power boats. The history is complicated by the fact that the original company, formed in 1967, went bankrupt before being purchased by current owner Genmar, and most historical documentation, both on the company itself and on the individual boat models, was lost. A collaborative, online effort might be the most efficient manner to reconstruct this history. I am seeking guidance as to whether to work within the Wikipedia environment, or to start a separate wiki. [[User:Stevedem|Stevedem]] 19:51, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Wikipedia could probably benefit from an article on the company and the boats, but as it is not a general knowledge base, a truly exhaustive treatment of them probably would fall outside the scope of wikipedia. Good luck, though. [[User:JosephBarillari|jdb ❋]] ([[User_talk:JosephBarillari|talk]]) 04:33, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== Substub Templates ==
In my opinion, there are numerous substubs, which need to be categorized. What is you opinion on making substub templates? [[User:Tezeti|<span style="background-color: #000000"><FONT COLOR="#00AA00">тə</FONT><FONT COLOR="#00CC00">zє</FONT><FONT COLOR="#00FF00">ті</FONT>]] 03:47, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)
:I think topic related stubs will be fine, but substubs may be pushing it. But then, I did not like the [[Template:Substub]] to begin with -- [[User:Chris 73|Chris 73]] [[User talk:Chris 73|Talk]] 05:28, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)
::Please coordinate this with the folks at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting]]. —[[User:Korath|Korath]] ([[User talk:Korath|Talk]]) 05:53, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)
:Please '''do not''' make substub subcategories! They will almost certainly be deleted by [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting]], as they just get in the way of the sorting process. The best things to do with substubs are (1) work out whether they need to be on vfd, merged, or enlarged; (2) if they need to be enlarged, add a little to them to turn them into stubs - THEN use a stub subcategory. [[User:Grutness| Grutness]]|<sup>[[User_talk:Grutness|hello?]]</sup> [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 10:48, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
==Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by birthyear==
I was thinking it would be interesting to see what Wikipedians would be in each age group and whatnot. In much the same way that Wikipedians haves lists by interest and ___location, how about one for birthyear? I have searched for it and have not seen anything resembling one.
However I have another one of my great ideas (which may or may not be agreed with). Why don't we make a new set of category for Wikipedians to assemble them? (i.e. Category:Wikipedian 1980 births|User:Wikipedianguy). But if this seems like too much, then I am fine with just a list. Just floating this idea in the air. -- [[User:Riffsyphon1024|Riffsyphon1024]] 05:15, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Can we lie about it? ;) [[User:Chris 73|Chris 73]] [[User talk:Chris 73|Talk]] 05:25, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)
: You can find this (very incomplete) list [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedians_by_age here] [[User:JoJan|JoJan]] 09:03, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
::Seeing how many lists at Wikimedia there are, I should have never asked. Still, why would I want to sign up again, just to sign my name? -- [[User:Riffsyphon1024|Riffsyphon1024]] 09:50, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
==Classification==
I've started adding classifications to category pages. It is possible already without software upgrades, and I find it helpful navigating around category hierarchies. I've written a page which I hope can be approved as Wikipedia policy. It is at '''[[Wikipedia:Classification]]'''. To see an example of what it looks like, I've classified many of the '''Theatre''' categories . Check out [[:Category:Altos]] and move up and down the '''Opera''' hierarchy. -- [[User:SamuelWantman|Samuel Wantman]] 12:29, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Implementing this by hand seems to make an unwarranted assumption that the hierarchy of categories will be stable. This particular example is in an area where that is probably true, but in other areas this could be a maintenance nightmare. -- [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 18:54, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)
::We can suggest that people wait before classifying any categories in flux. I know I'd wait! -- [[User:SamuelWantman|Samuel Wantman]] 20:24, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== Go and Search buttons ==
(I use the classic skin) Would it be possible to get the Go and Search buttons to do their stuff but open in a new window if right clicked? -- [[User:SGBailey|SGBailey]] 09:36, 2005 Mar 9 (UTC)
== Proposal to control racing greyhound breeding numbers ==
Throughout the world we are witnessing major problems
arising from a surplus of racing greyhounds.
The greyhound has a very short racing career and only
its suitability for breeding may save it from ???
There cannot be any justification for destroying a dog simply because it was too slow,too old ( 5yrs),
too placid,too expensive to feed or any other feeble
reasons proffered.
I am full of praise for those wonderful people who
run Greyhound Adoption Centres but alas I feel They are losing ground and it is now time for our Countries administrators to take action to protect
these warm,wonderful but defenceless creatures.
I am sure everybody connected with the sport would welcome controls to help alleviate the dark side of their pusuit.
:To [[User:144.134.102.30]]: This is Wikipedia, an encyclopedia. We do not influence breeding programs of greyhounds. We only write about it if it is worth an encyclopedia article. While i in general are against the killing of animals just because they have outlived their usefulness, this is the wrong place for that. Sorry -- [[User:Chris 73|Chris 73]] [[User talk:Chris 73|Talk]] 11:50, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
::After the Tsunami in Asia, there was a link on the Wikipedia page that linked to a page talking about how to help out (donating money, etc). More people die every day from HIV-AIDS than from the September 11th Terrorist Attacks. Why is there not a "How to help with HIV-AIDS Releif" link? or a "Stop killing dogs" link? --[[User:Munchkinguy|Munchkinguy]] 15:50, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:::More people die every day from [[heart disease]] than HIV-AIDS. Why not have a ''Stop smoking and lose some weight!'' link? Because this is an encyclopedia. The tsunami link was a rare exception. Helping those with HIV/AIDS is a great cause, but this just isn't the place to promote it. [[User:Carrp|Carrp]] | [[User talk:Carrp|Talk]] 17:16, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:I think the anon may have been confused by the idea of this page being for "proposals". [[User:Smoddy|Smoddy]] [[User talk:Smoddy|(t)]] [[Special:Emailuser/Smoddy|(e)]] 17:21, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Question: Why/How was the tsunami link a "rare exception"? --[[User:Munchkinguy|Munchkinguy]] 19:32, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
It is perfectly reasonable for an encyclopedia to explain and examine controversial and/or politically charged issues and other causes. It is perfectly reasonable for Wikipedia to have links to organizations working on those causes. The only thing we should require is that issues are presented in a NPOV way. That said, I think it would be good to have links to everything mentioned in the comments above -- without the inflammatory language. -- [[User:SamuelWantman|Samuel Wantman]] 03:51, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== RSS Feed of new Articles ==
I would love to see an RSS feed of wikipedia's newest articles. Personally, I love to browse the site for any sort of information. If I could add an RSS link to Firefox and see what the newest pages are, I'd love it. I have a feeling many other people enjoy the link. Is this possible, I do not know how to even being making this happen, so I am leaving it to someone else.
thanks
--[[User:24.30.19.8|24.30.19.8]] 03:29, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)Mark Bashuk, Marietta, GA
:Do you really want to drink from the fire hose? The English language Wikipedia is currently getting roughly a thousand new articles a day. If you ''really'' want to, it already exists [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Newpages&feed=rss here]. -- [[User:Cyrius|Cyrius]]|[[User talk:Cyrius|✎]] 05:36, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== semi-protection for frequently vandalized pages ==
I propose a new form of page protection. Some pages are repeatedly, time and time again, vandalized by hit-and-run edits from anonymous IP addresses. Most IP addresses cannot be blocked since they are dynamic, etc. For example, 377 out of the last 500 edits on [[George W. Bush]] were vandalism and 90% of those were by IP addresses. That's a whole lot of effort spent by editors that could be spent elsewhere. You might say, fine, everyone watches those pages, so it's no big deal. However, it is a big deal because it ''seriously impedes any kind of forward progress'' on these pages, which also tend to be very poor articles (back and forth, negative edits vs. proponent responses).
The proposal is simply to allow semi-protection so that anonymous users would get something not too different from the "protected page" message (perhaps the same message even), but that registered accounts could edit away. Regular protection obviously does not address this problem.
I looked at the last 5000 edits on Wikipedia, about 628 were reversions. Of those, 459 seem to be edits made
from an anonymous IP address. Now, which articles ''might'' be semi-protected? Some examples of articles that are frequently vandalized:
* [[George W. Bush]]
* [[Negro]]
* [[Penis]]
* [[Adolf Hitler]]
* [[Ku Klux Klan]]
* [[African American]]
[[User:Daniel Quinlan|Daniel Quinlan]] 03:38, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
:I like your suggestion. I would think it should be quite easy to implement too. -- [[User:SGBailey|SGBailey]] 09:20, 2005 Mar 10 (UTC)
::If something like this is going to be implemented, why not extend it to the main page? It was my understanding that the main issue there was anonymous vandalism as well. It would certainly be a benefit to In The News and Did You Know. This is sort of the opposite approach of the "super-user" idea that I saw here recently, in that the change is to the pages rather than the status of users. - [[User:BanyanTree|<nowiki></nowiki>]][[User:BanyanTree|Banyan]][[User talk:BanyanTree|<font color=green>Tree</font>]] 16:13, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:::I've thought for a while that this should be done, but it should be extended to include people with less than 50 edits or an account less than one week old - it's very easy to set up an account anyway, and many vandals do so now (anon vandals are less enthusiastic about their work and are usually just playing around). [[User:Violetriga|violet/riga]] [[User_talk:violetriga|(t)]] 17:26, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
::::This might just be a very effective anti-vandalism measure, especialy if we included [[user:violetriga|Violet]]'s suggestion. However, if a large number of pages were 'semi-protected', this measure might undermine the vaunted openness of Wikipedia. Therefore, I suggest that there should be very strict guidelines for admins if this were to be implemented, and a very clear process of straw-poll voting to lift or lower semi-protected status. [[User:Garzo|Gareth Hughes]] 17:50, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:::::We are approaching half a million articles in the English Wikipedia. Protecting a few hundred or even a few thousand articles is not lack of openness; its less than 1%. This seems a no brainer; as it will solve most of the vandalism problem in one stroke. :[[User:ChrisG|ChrisG]] 19:39, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:::::There's always reasonable limits to freedom. If we're having to spend a lot of energy keeping a very small number of articles protected from vandalism, then that's time being taken away from the development of these articles as well as the rest of the Wikipedia. This would seem to be a reasonable trade-off. But I do agree with the idea that we need strict guidelines for implementing this. That said, there are a few obvious articles to start with even before the guidelines are in place. — [[User:Stevietheman|<span style="color:green"><b>Stevie is the man!</b></span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Talk</span>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Contrib</span>]]</sup> 23:42, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Although this might be a good idea, I'd like to play devil's advocate and bring up a few counterarguments:
:* Is required registration a sufficient deterrent? How many of the vandals would register and then vandalize the page instead, if they were required to? They don't do so now because they don't need to. Would a tool emerge to automate registration? Would they seek unprotected pages to vandalize instead? There will always be controversial pages we miss. Remember, push and pull.
::: Sufficient for all vandals? No. For most, probably. I suspect a lot of would-be vandals happen across the site and do their thing. And if it doesn't help, we can always roll it back out as a feature. I think it will definitely help, though.
:* Although many are not aware of this, each section of the main page is stored in a template which is unprotected. Anyone can edit these, although there is the annoying technical problem of the main page requiring an explicit cache refresh. I don't really think we want anyone changing the ''format'' of the main page without community consent, just the content.
::: I am ambivalent about extending this to the Main page; that was not part of my proposal.
:* While Wikipedians understand the value of limited protection, outsiders often see it as hypocrisy, contradicting our principles, or worse, pushing our own bias by selective article protection. This may deter new editors. Don't forget that in some cases today's vandal ("can I really edit this?") is often tomorrow's dedicated editor.
::: I think that is pure hyperbole. Most outside people are '''amazed''' about our limited level of protection.
:* Who would have the power to turn this on and off, and why would we trust them to do so in an unbiased way? What if energy is wasted debating whether this protection should be applied or not, or even warring by changing it back and forth?
::: Administrators, clearly. I think we could use objective criteria, something like "more than 10% of the edits to the page are reversions to IP address vandalism". Voting isn't even required when backed by such clear statistics (in policy), although I think straw polls would be useful, as (almost) always. [[User:Daniel Quinlan|Daniel Quinlan]] 04:31, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
:::*10% isn't nearly enough. I doubt that there is a page on a well-known topic related to, say, the French Revolution or any ethnic group that wouldn't make that threshhold. There are many pages where the '''majority''' of activity is IP vandalism and the corresponding reversions. -- [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 05:53, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
:::: I'll concede that perhaps I have too much faith in anonymous editors. Perhaps a higher figure is needed. I think 20% is more than enough, though. [[User:Daniel Quinlan|Daniel Quinlan]] 06:08, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
:Just some thoughts — don't abandon your ideas, but just think about consequences carefully, especially about push and pull. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 10:57, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
It would be against SoftSecurity wiki principle. If anons will get a page explaining they have to register to vandalize the page, part of them will register and the vandalism will be harder to spot.
I'd prefer another proposed form of semi-protection - edits to such articles would become visible only after some delay / after beeing patrolled. --[[User:Wikimol|Wikimol]] 23:44, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
*There is a big misunderstaning when people want to block edits form anonimous because they thing that would avoid vandals. It's all the other way around. We have users logged in so we can easily flag well-faithed edits. People with evil intentions would simply create a dummy account, and that would simply inflate wikipedia with dummy users. '''User login is made to detect good edits''', and blocking anons will simply turn useless this tool.--[[User:Avsa|Alexandre Van de Sande]] 00:50, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
See [[m:Anonymous users should not be allowed to edit articles]] and [[m:Posting by anonymous users should be limited, but not banned]]. I feel obliged to point out that these proposals usually don't go anywhere; people start off with "reasonable" limits, then others extend these limits, then others shoot the whole thing down as anti-wiki, then it all lingers until the new wave of people who notice that there's a lot of vandalism going on come with proposals. I'm not saying re-opening the discussion is ''pointless'', mind you. Attitudes may shift, solutions may be re-evaluated. [[User:JRM|JRM]] 12:56, 2005 Mar 14 (UTC)
== please consider this idea about collecting ideas from everywhere ==
Consider all the people in the world, many of them thinking up new ideas or inventions from time to time. You know, the 2 a.m. brainwave that we have neither the money nor the training to bring to completion but that has some merit nevertheless.
How about building a data base that intakes ideas and idea fragments from all over the world, continuously, with a user-friendly and intelligently organized front-end. The data base itself has to be very robust, and also very intelligently organized. All ideas will be assigned to one or more categories, with many characteristics attachable.
The coolest part, and the reason for doing all of this, is to provide free access to any and all who wish to mine the database. Think of the synergy! This project could have tremendous impact on the development of the human race!
This project would provide enormous challenges for the people who organize it and make it interactive. What a fantastic and worthwhile enterprise, sort of like the Glass Bead Game a million times over.
The part I would like to play in it is to help create feed-in points in all countries and communities in the world. People submitting ideas could provide data about themselves if they chose to do so. This would permit others who found their ideas useful to contact them, or at least to know something about how the idea came about. And over time, the data would provide amazing information about the generation of ideas, the context in which they arise, and so on.
Anybody up for making this Idea Gathering Project a reality?
Linda Golley
linda_golley@yahoo.com
lgolley@u.washington.edu
:This would be more appropriate on Meta. [[User:Maurreen|Maurreen]] 06:39, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Sort of like www.halfbakery.com or www.shouldexist.org But yeah, I was thinking the same thing; that a wiki would be a great way to collaboratively invent things. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 02:36, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
:Although this would, yes, be more appropriate on meta, I can't help but comment that the tendency of humans to withhold their best ideas so that they are not stolen would be bound to limit its usefulness. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 10:43, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== AMD ==
I've had an idea in mind for a long time which I think can now be realized within the Wikipedia framework.
It's really pretty simple...an Audio Music Dictionary.
Just as its name implies, it would be a music dictionary with (mpeg) audio examples. Since music is often called a "language" in its own right, it makes sense to me that Wikipedia would be the right place for it to reside.
If you like the idea and can help me find a mentor to get this organized and underway, please respond here.
When I had the idea originally, I worked at it briefly with a Macintosh and HyperCard, but I was always thinking of the day when universal networking would make the project really possible.
BTW, I'm not clear on the signing instructions, but I'm reachable at [[User:207.62.243.195|207.62.243.195]] 00:44, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) carlnoe@gmail.com and the date is March 10, 2005
:The main problem with this is liable to be copyrights. Even where works themselves are public ___domain, most recordings are copyrighted.
:Also, if you are planning to spearhead a project, you really should open an account. It will make things simpler all around. Among other things, it will let you watchlist the relevant articles. -- [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 00:56, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
::A related project would be [[:commons:Commons:Main Page|Wikimedia Commons]], collecting free files. While there are mainly images, there is also a section for Music ([[:commons:Category:Music]]). However, everything there has to be free, i.e. Public Domain, GFDL, Creative commons, ... Sorry, no Britney Spears. But, e.g. [[Enrico Caruso]] would be good. -- [[User:Chris 73|Chris 73]] [[User talk:Chris 73|Talk]] 01:07, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. I'll get an account Saturday and look into those things. (I'm on a library computer at a school right now.)
I think Chris is right...no copyrights would be needed on these sort of musical examples, and no copyrighted material would be allowed. As no one would copyright individual words in a dictionary, no one would copyright musical terms/examples in an AMD.
As an example, think of the word "flute" linked to an brief mpeg of an open-hole note played on a flute.
:We use .ogg format on the wikipedia, as it is free from licensing and patents, etc. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 16:34, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Baseline revision]] ==
I have started off our first attempt to find a baseline revision for [[Common Unix Printing System]]. The proposal is here and is locked in to stop vandals from editing the URL to the revision: [[Common Unix Printing System/Proposed baseline]]. See the [[Talk:Common Unix Printing System/Proposed baseline|talk page]] to see the objections and review for the proposed baseline revision. - [[User:Ta bu shi da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]] 02:59, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== Table namespace and editor ==
I added informal voting to the [[Wikipedia:Proposal_for_intuitive_table_editor_and_namespace#Informal_voting|Proposal for intuitive table editor and namespace]] page. Please add your vote. Do you like it? Is it stupid? - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 16:34, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
== A schools template ==
I know schools are a pretty touchy issue on Wiki at the moment but I don't think this should mean they couldn't be a little more organised. I've made a draft [[Template:School]] which borrows heavily from [[Template:University information]]. I havn't tried implementing the template anywhere yet. Comments and Suggestions please? [[User:LukeSurl|LukeSurl]] 23:22, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Actually I have just tried it out on [[Adams' Grammar School|my own School]].[[User:LukeSurl|LukeSurl]] 00:12, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== Providing Wikipedia articles in audio format ==
Wikipedia is a great source of information to people around the world, but there are thousands of people who would love to be able to hear the content rather then read it, for instance people with eye problems or people that have trouble reading or people who don't want to waste their time listening to the radio or watching television when they could be listening to a world of knowledge, this will be possible when articles in the Wikipedia are made into audio files and made available for download, this concept is not new it was done with a book written by Lawrence Lessig called Free Culture http://webjay.org/by/lucas_gonze/lessigfreecultureaudiobookproject, several people made audio files of one of the chapters and made them avable to download as a podcast.
Having the Wikipedia in the audio format would be a truly marvels resource.
:Yes, it would be good. However, it would probably be a huge resource on our servers, so I would say that it is not a project for WikiMedia to apply themselves to. However, I would say that it could be done by an external source, taking the page from Wikipedia on the fly. I don't think this is feasible for us to do. [[User:Smoddy|Smoddy]] [[User talk:Smoddy|(t)]] [[Special:Emailuser/Smoddy|(e)]] [[User:Smoddy/Greece gallery|(g)]] 14:36, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
: Sounds like a good idea to me. [[User:Matt Crypto|— Matt <small>Crypto</small>]] 15:08, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:The German wikipedia already has several Featured articles in audio format and .ogg-files don't take up all that much space. Nice idea. I support it. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 17:18, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
::The other trouble is, unless we have on-the-fly generation (which is what my above reply was referring to) we are essentially creating forks of the page. It would only be possible to do this with articles that were essentially complete, which is against the wiki-spirit. [[User:Smoddy|Smoddy]] [[User talk:Smoddy|(t)]] [[Special:Emailuser/Smoddy|(e)]] [[User:Smoddy/Greece gallery|(g)]] 17:24, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:::We could make it only in specific article, like the most visited page. And we could place information about the audio file, like "audio according to revision (number) on (date)". [[User:Roscoe x|Roscoe x]] 22:35, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
::::There is that. Would be better if we could have some kind of regular updates, though. <i>[[User:Smoddy|Smoddy]] (<sub>[[User talk:Smoddy|t]]</sub><sup>[[User:Smoddy/Greece gallery|g]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Emailuser/Smoddy|e]]</sub><sup>[[Special:Contributions/Smoddy|c]]</sup>)</i> 23:54, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:ouln't it better to just [[text-to-speech]] what you want? You get to hear any article, up to date and don mess anyones servers space.--[[User:Avsa|Alexandre Van de Sande]] 00:35, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== Wikipedian category ==
I just saw the "Category:Wikipedians", could we make something like "Category:Wikipedians interested in ..." or "Category:Wikipedians master in..." or "Category:Wikipedians doctorate in ..." or "Category:Wikipedians expert at ...".[[User:Roscoe x|Roscoe x]] 22:25, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== Web to print ==
I've noticed sites like AlwaysOn[http://www.alwayson-network.com] have gone from online to print—and there are a few more as part of this phenomenon. Is this a worthwhile article for Wikipedia? (Feel free to move this if I have put it in the wrong place.) [[User:Stombs|Stombs]] 05:16, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
== Search engine for categories. ==
I've noticed that when I find an article that I want to assign some category, it is very difficult to find the proper category. There are tens of thousands of them. Searching through the [[Special:Category]] page for the right one would take literally forever. Would it be possible to implement a search engine for categories? Or does this feature already exists, and I just don't know about it. [[User:DaveTheRed|DaveTheRed]] 07:43, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== MobileWiki ==
Yes, being an avid fan of "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy," I realize this idea is a bit contrived and probably not feasible, but I see no reason why I shouldn't suggest it. Wikipedia's great appeal is that it has scores of information on a variety of topics, no? There are many things to be learned here, but we're not always at a computer. So, maybe a MobileWiki project could be started. A Wikipedia server could be dedicated to broadcasting to cellphone browsers, PDAs, and other forms of mobile electronic media so that people could at least read (probably not edit) articles from whereever they are. In an ideal universe there would be a separate device just for this with full color screen, but I realize that is a bit too idyllic.
However, just as the internet based itself on an existing network of telephone lines, Wikipedia could work off of existing cellphone technology and be able to "broadcast" good ol' wiki-fun over large portions of the globe. And I'm sure there is no shortage of good samaritans willing to act as intermediary signal boosters to let the Amazons partake as well.
I don't know, the concept of having a mobile repository of every conceivable piece of information you'd ever need right in the palm of your hands was a really groovy idea when Adams first came up with it, and now that we have the hard part, the actual compendium of information, it's only a minor yet natural step to making this information accessible regardless of ___location. As has been seen with the Trillian chat program's integration of Wikipedia into its own interface tells me that the wiki software is more than capable of being formatted in a variety of ways other than HTML.
My email address is rokenrol@gmail.com, my user name here is rokenrol. Tell me what you think.
:Sure that's great. But we don't really need a dedicated wiki to it. As more and more connected pda's are out there anything in the web shall be accessible from a mobile device. In this subject, wikipedia is uite ready, as it's fluid layout, an full [[CSS]] customization allows it to be read in any screen resolution.
:But now what woul be really great is if we could have a full integration of gps, wikipedia and wikitravel (which is a lot more "hitchhiker's guide" than wikipedia) so we could get relevant information about where we are.--[[User:Avsa|Alexandre Van de Sande]] 13:19, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== request: a tab for questions and answers related to the subject of a page ==
Dear wikipedians, i wish it was made possible to ask and answer more specific questions about wikipedia page's subject in a special tab that would be called "questions and answers". Something like google answers service, but categorized automatically according to wikipedia page subjects.
I am aware of the discussions tab, but i think it would be beneficial for exchange of knowledge to dedicate another tab solely for questions and answers related to the subject. A discussion tab really does not encourage to ask or answer questions. What the discussion tab seems to do is to cause debate about what kind of content should or shouldn't be in a page.
I claim that the questions and answers tab would serve wikipedia users need for knowledge better than the discussion tab.
14th of march 2005, an active wikipedia user
| 