This is an archive of past discussions with User:Titoxd. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi, Titoxd. I am going to nominate the Oil shale and Oil shale extraction articles for FAC. As the last peer reviews of these articles were not very productive, I wonder if you agree to take a look and give some advice and hard critics before proceeding with the FAC nomination? Thank you in advance. Beagel (talk) 19:47, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Peer review idea
Hi, I have made a proposal that no peer review request be archived without some response. To aid in this, there is a new list of PR requests at least one week old that have had no repsonses beyond a semi-automated peer review. This list is at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog.
There are just over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, so I figure if each of these volunteers reviewed just one or two PR requests without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog (as there have been 2 or 3 such unanswered requests a day on average).
If you would be able to help out with a review or two a month from the "no responses" backlog list that would be great (and much appreciated). Please discuss questions, comments, or ideas at the PR talk page and thanks in advance for your help, Ruhrfisch><>°°23:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
What to say? What to say! I really thank you for your well-written support in my request for adminship, which passed 92/2/2. No longer will I have to bug you or any of the other WPTC admins simply to move a sandbox of mine over a redirect! It's been a pleasure working with you, so here goes nothing in maintaining the community's support in my judgment. BTW, the offer still stands, if you manage to get Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale to FA. ;) ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:51, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. Degrassi: The Next Generation is currently being Peer Reviewed here, and I was wondering if you would be able to give it a copy edit before I take it to WP:FAC. Any help, big or small would be appreciated. Thank you -- Matthew 20:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
P.S. I love what you did at the blogpage. That's actually how I edit Wikipedia - by printing the article, putting pen to paper, and then typing it up!
Hi there. You are receiveing this message because your name appears on the WikiProject Councilparticipants list. The WikiProject Council is currently having a roll-call; if you are still interested in participating in the inter-project discussion forum that WT:COUNCIL has become, or you are interested in continuing to develop and maintain the WikiProject Guide or Directory, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Participants and remove the asterisk (*) from your name on the list of participants. If you are no longer interested in the Council, you need take no action: your name will be removed from the participants list on April 302008.
I saw your name on the PR volunteer list, so I decided to come to you. The Aang article was kept from FA status mainly for one reason: prose. I would really appreciate it if you could look over the article and provide some comments on the prose or maybe even copyedit it yourself. Thanks. — Parent5446(tnceml)21:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Titoxd, glad to see everyone so cheery today but be careful with cross nominating pages at MFD. I had to remove some of them because it was spawning the deletion tag all over the place. And Happy April Fools you joker :P...¤~Persian Poet Gal(talk)21:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Aprils fools day was a blast. Loads of users lightened up to have good old fashion fun. I want to thank you for taking part in editing this page in particular and even though I may not know you, embrace the same talk pages, or even edit with you in the near future, I'd like to award you this Barnstar for making Wikipedia a fun environment in which to contribute. Until next year. :) SynergeticMaggot (talk) 13:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
This is the monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary, both of the activities of the WikiProject and global tropical cyclone activity. If you wish to change how you receive this newsletter, or no longer wish to receive it, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. This newsletter covers all of March 2008.
Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve monitoring of the WikiProject's articles.
Storm of the month
Cyclone Jokwe
Cyclone Jokwe was the first tropical cyclone to make landfall in Mozambique since Cyclone Favio struck in the previous year. The tenth named storm of the 2007-08 South-West Indian Ocean cyclone season, Jokwe was first classified as a tropical depression on March 2 over the open Southwest Indian Ocean. It tracked west-southwest, crossing northern Madagascar as a tropical storm on March 5 before intensifying into a tropical cyclone on March 6. Jokwe rapidly intensified to reach peak winds of 195 km/h (120 mph), before weakening slightly and striking Nampula Province in northeastern Mozambique. It quickly weakened while paralleling the coastline, though the storm restrengthened as it turned southward in the Mozambique Channel. Late in its duration, it remained nearly stationary for several days, and steadily weakened due to wind shear before dissipating on March 16.
The storm caused minor damage in northern Madagascar. In Mozambique, the cyclone affected 165,000 people, and left at least sixteen fatalities. Cyclone Jokwe destroyed over 9,000 houses and damaged over 3,000 more, with the heaviest damage in Angoche and the Island of Mozambique in Nampula Province. The storm also caused widespread power outages and crop damages.
Other tropical cyclone activity
There were no named tropical cyclones in the South Pacific ocean, though a tropical depression developed near Vanuatu in the third week of the month.
The March member of the month is CapeVerdeWave, whose first edit was to a tropical cyclone article, back in January 2006. CapeVerdeWave has been a steady and active member of the project, writing several articles on Category 5 hurricanes as well as working on the often forgotten older hurricanes. The user also has contributed to some older season articles, and recently helped update the project after the recent hurricane re-analysis. We thank him for his continued dedication.
Project News: Updates on the Best Track - Atlantic and North Indian Ocean, and more
In February, the Hurricane Research Division released its reanalysis for the Atlantic Ocean from 1915 to 1920. Highlights include the addition of eight storms, as well as the removal of one storm. The winds in the 1919 Florida Keys Hurricane were increased to 130 knots, and the 1916 Texas hurricane was increased to a Category 4 hurricane.
According to an email sent to the India Meteorological Department, there will be an online version of the North Indian Ocean best track from 1877 to 2006, scheduled to be released in two months; it is unknown if it will cost money to access.
In unrelated news, the project was featured on the Signpost; Mitchazenia was interviewed, and talked about the past, present, and future of the project.
I've been working on the Tropical cyclone WikiProject for almost four years now and I know that at times it can be pretty draining. Hurricanehink and I started a fun little thing two years ago called the Hurricane Hall of Fame (based on a concept I'd created much earlier). It works just like any other Hall of Fame: every year, five storms are voted in based on notability. Up until now, the voters were just me and Hink and the honorees were just Atlantic storms. Both of those are changing (hopefully). I'm trying to get more Project members involved in the voting and I'm going international this year. This ballot is for the Eastern Pacific. Following this election, I'll send out ballots for the Western Pacific and then perhaps the Indian Ocean...all leading up to the Atlantic ballot early this summer. I'd really appreciate your participation. It's just for fun; something to lower stress levels. I'll announce the winners next weekend. The nominees are...
1939 Long Beach Tropical Storm - Only tropical storm to make landfall in California in the 20th Century, killed in excess of 40 people at sea and in floods.
Hi. You were listed as a general copy-editor on the peer review volunteer page. Your volunteer comment said that you were an ESL reader. Dredg has many fans outside of English speaking countries, and I would like for the article to be easy for them to follow. I would greatly appreciate if you could assist with the Dredg peer review. Thank you. --Ars Sycro (talk) 02:11, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Titoxd (Re: Withdraw AfD nomination for Audiocom article)
How are you? I need your help here. I want to withdraw my nomination to delete Audiocom article. Can you help me out. Thanks in advance. Jrod2 (talk) 08:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Tito, this is the first time that I have withdrawn an AfD nomination. Was I suppose to put a tag like {{rescue}} or something like that on the AfD article page? Let me know. Thanks. Jrod2 (talk) 09:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, you peer reviewed Facebook a few weeks ago. If you have time, could you please take a second look at the article as it is now and post some comments at the peer review? Please let us know if the comments you posted last time have been addressed or not. I would like to bring the article to FAC soon, so any copyediting help would also be greatly appreciated. Thanks! GaryKing(talk)00:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
This is the monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary, both of the activities of the WikiProject and global tropical cyclone activity. If you wish to change how you receive this newsletter, or no longer wish to receive it, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. This newsletter covers all of April 2008.
Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve monitoring of the WikiProject's articles.
Storm of the month
Typhoon Neoguri on April 17
Typhoon Neoguri was the earliest tropical cyclone on record to strike China. It formed on April 13 to the east of the Philippines, and once entering the South China Sea, environmental conditions allowed for quick strengthening. Neoguri attained its peak intensity of 150 km/h (90 mph) as it approached the island of Hainan, though rapidly weakened due to unfavorable conditions. The system made landfall in southern China on April 19, causing three deaths and moderate damage totaling over ¥296 million (2008 RMB, $42 million 2008 USD). The typhoon left 40 fishermen missing in the South China Sea.
Other tropical cyclone activity
A weak tropical depression formed near New Caledonia in the South Pacific ocean early in the month, and another tropical depression developed in the basin later in the month.
Two named storms formed in the Australian region during the month, including Tropical Cyclone Durga, which was the first ever cyclone named by the Tropical Cyclone Warning Centre in Jakarta, Indonesia. Tropical Cyclone Rosie co-existed with Durga for much of its duration.
Cyclone Nargis developed in the North Indian Ocean late in the month, and reached its peak intensity early in May; further details will be covered in the next newsletter.
Member of the month
Cyclone barnstar
The April member of the month is VOFFA. Though not officially a project member, VOFFA is an important user to the project, having maintained and updated the talk page archives on tropical cyclones worldwide; activity includes adding warnings and discussions for all storms. The user is particularly active during the off-season of the Atlantic basin, when article activity on tropical cyclones typically declines.
During the month, Hurricane Camille was demoted from GA status, continuing the trend of good articles degrading in status on notable storms; other occurrences include the FA removal of Cyclone Tracy and 1900 Galveston Hurricane. If anyone has any ideas how to fix the problem, feedback and ideas are appreciated.
Yea, I know there was an A-class assessment, but that appears to be a while ago before our standards were as high as they are now. For one thing, there's no aftermath and there's that trivia-like section, which is against the MoS. If you believe it should be A-class still, by all means go back and change it. JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone13:29, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
This discussion is effectively closed, but this and this discussions at the Pump and this discussion at the Assessment talk needs to happen at the same place. I completely agree to you on that. Is it just possible to close the proposal page discussion and put the arguments (there are a few) on the other discussion, possibly in a collapsible format? Will it be disruptive or something? I hope not, as it will put all the eggs in the same basket ready to be sorted. No? Aditya(talk • contribs)14:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't think closing this discussion is necessary, as it seems to have had a natural death. The other pump discussion may benefit from closure, at least to point all eyes to one place. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff)20:34, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Rfb participation thanks
Hello, Titoxd.
I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know. Once again, thank you for your support. -- Avi (talk) 18:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Let me know if I haven't fulfilled the comments you made for GA. I searched for a couple hours regarding ENSO connection to the jet stream, and nearly all references concerned North America. I did find a couple that mentioned Europe and South America, and the limited information found was added into the article. Thegreatdr (talk) 15:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks for your participation in my recent request for adminship. I am impressed by the amount of thought that goes into people's contribution to the RfA process, and humbled that so many have chosen to trust me with this new responsibility. I step into this new role cautiously, but will do my very best to live up to your kind words and expectations, and to further the project of the encyclopedia. Again, thank you. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 06:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Tito, I've got travel pending, so need to get the next Dispatch assigned. They typically run three days late, so the 26th Signpost probably won't go out until at least the 29th. Are you still planning to use it to write up the Assessment poll? If you, so you can see sample dispatches at {{FCDW}}, and you can write at the temporary file, Wikipedia:FCDW/May 26, 2008, where you can pop in any text and Tony1 (talk·contribs) and Jbmurray (talk·contribs) will probably come in while you're working and help with copyediting (so you don't have to worry too much about the quality of your writing). Pls let me know, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:34, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi, just dropping in to echo SandyG's encouragement, and also to say that I've watchlisted that redlink and am ready to help out as soon as you can put some content up. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 04:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
I have replied to Jbmurray here. Tito, we could really use your input at this point, to come up with several examples of Start/C/B articles - border cases as well as central cases would be great. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 21:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for you work as a peer review volunteer. Since March, there has been a concerted effort to make sure all peer review requests get some response. Requests that have gone three days or longer without a substantial response are listed at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog. I have three requests to help this continue.
1) If you are asked to do a peer review, please ask the person who made the request to also do a review, preferably of a request that has not yet had feedback. This is fairly simple, but helps. For example when I review requests on the backlog list, I close with Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, ...
2) While there are several people who help with the backlog, lately I have been doing up to 3 or 4 peer reviews a day and can not keep this up much longer. We need help. Since there are now well over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, if each volunteer reviewed just one PR request without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog. To help spread out the load, I suggest those willing pick a day of the month and do a review that day (for example, my first edit was on the 8th, so I could pick the 8th). Please pick a peer review request with no responses yet, if possible off the backlog list. If you want, leave a note on my talk page as to which day you picked and I will remind you each month.
3) I have made some proposals to add some limits to peer review requests at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review#Proposed_limits. The idea is to prevent any one user from overly burdening the process. These seem fairly reasonable (one PR request per editor per day, only four total PR requests per editor at a time, PR requests with cleanup banners can be delisted (like GAN quick fail), and wait two weeks to relist a PR request after it is archived), but have gotten no feedback in one week. If you have any thoughts on these, please weigh in.
Thanks for taking the time to notify me. Unfortunately, v5.20 does not work for me. It no longer crashes as we saw in v5.0 and v5.1, however when I put in a name and click "proceed", as soon as it communicates with Wikipedia a modal dialogue pops up that says 'buggy - please download current version' and hangs (doesn't appear to ever download anything). If you're interested or need more info please let me know. Thanks again! /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 11:59, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for long delay in getting back to you. Looks to work great -- thanks for the fix!! Any chance you'll have a chance to add some features (similar to kate/wbk, analysis of multiple editors' histories, etc)? /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 01:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Dispatch for June 14?
Hi. It seems that there was a bit of a miscommunication regarding the previous dispatch on changing the assessment scheme. Do you think you guys can commit to writing a draft for June 14? Please comment and watchlist here. Many thanks. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 01:30, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Your documentation request
Hi there - noticed a request for documentation on the Village Pump page for FritzpollBot. I have actually covered this vaguely in the section I added when I noticed this page about an hour ago. I will happily provide documentation - how comprehensive do you want it to be (say, compared to what I have written) Fritzpoll (talk) 11:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
C-Class discussion
I saw your announcement at WP:AN and visited the polling page. As I know nothing about the subject, I immediately looked for and expected there to be a link in the polling header text to where the template is described, discussed, etc. but there is none. The template is not self-explanatory and, in fact, indicates it's deprecated. What I'm saying is, shouldn't there be (isn't there?) somewhere to link to in the poll text that gives some background for those not already familiar with the subject? Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Tropical cyclogenesis GA Sweeps Review: On Hold
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria and I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I have reviewed Tropical cyclogenesis and believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I have left this message on your talk page since you have significantly edited the article (based on using this article history tool). Please consider helping address the several points that I listed on the talk page of the article, which shouldn't take too long to fix with the assistance of multiple editors. I have also left messages on the talk pages for other editors and a related WikiProject to spread the workload around some. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:23, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Do you want to write this up for this coming week (see my talk page) - or for the week after? It depends whether you want to have it written up to publicise the poll, or to announce the result. I'd prefer the latter, but if you strongly prefer the former, you'd better write it up now. I have very limited internet (public libraries), but I'll try to vcheck tomorrow. Walkerma.
Tito, if you can begin to rough something out at WP:FCDW/June 16, 2008, with the idea of having a draft by the 13th, others will help ce and round it out. You can see other sample Dispatches at {{FCDW}}. You could begin roughing in basic definitions, the history of the Assessment scheme, some data/stats on article assessments Projectwide, things like that, so that everything else will be in place to add the poll results once they're in. You can coordinate work throught the talk page at WP:FCDW/June 16, 2008. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Tito, I also left this note for Walkerma ... we're past publication date, and there are still three inline comments that should urgently be addressed (search on <!) ... the description of C-class is missing, we need better examples, and the description of B-class is inconsistent with info in the Grading scheme relative to C-class. Readers who are unaware of and uninvolved with assessment need a clear idea of what B and C are. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:47, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Effects of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans GA Sweeps Review: On Hold
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria and I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I have reviewed Effects of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans and believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I have left this message on your talk page since you have significantly edited the article (based on using this article history tool). Please consider helping address the several points that I listed on the talk page of the article, which shouldn't take too long to fix with the assistance of multiple editors. I have also left messages on the talk pages for other editors and related WikiProjects to spread the workload around some. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 21:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
C-Class
C-Class is coming to a project near you! Your proposal did seem to get enough support to indicate a consensus. I think some of the objections can in fact be handled by improving the system at the same time as we make the changes. I've updated Wikipedia:FCDW/June 16, 2008, and this was also revamped a couple of nights ago, can you check it over before it goes to press?
As I see it, there are three main things that need to be done at this point to introduce C-Class.
Agree on the detail of how we define C-Class, and also how things like B and Start will be affected. Should we adopt the MILHIST criteria for B-Class? They seem pretty good, and also quite well respected - but what do you think?
Rewrite all the definitions very carefully, and include a wide range of suitable examples.
Technical issues - add relevant code to the bots and templates, and things like Igor and Outriggr's tool.
I'm happy for you to take charge of 1 and 3, while I focus on getting #2 organized - would that be acceptable to you?
