User talk:Calaka

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Calaka is taking a short wikibreak to get ready for exams and will be back on Wikipedia once the exams are over on June 26.

calaka is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Welcome!

Hello, Calaka, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

Since you seem to be interested in anatomy, could you help with this- Skysmith 13:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. You article may need some formatting and wikification (ie. addition to wikilinks) but otherwise fine. I update my missing topics pages one at the time but I'll come back to medicine eventually. Keep up the good work. - Skysmith 10:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- You've really been busy. Keep up the good work - Skysmith 15:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article creation/editing tips/suggestios:

[edit] Re: chronic inflammation

Welcome, congratulations on diving right on in to the missing topics! You did a fine job with creating the article, but there are just a couple of concerns I'd like to bring up. When you create an article, introductory websites make for fine reference sources, but you must take care not to quote them verbatim. Because such text itself may be a creative work covered under copyright, adding it to Wikipedia, where all contributions are released under the GFDL, may constitute copyright infringement. It's best to paraphrase sources in a summary style, that is, try to preserve useful information but not necessarily the exact content. Finally, you can add four tildes (~~~~) to the end of your talk page posts to add a signature and time stamp (like this ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 10:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)).

Anyway, thank you for contributing and I hope you enjoy editing here! BTW, are you a doctor or medical student? ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 10:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citations

Hey there. Found the Geschwind syndrome article on recent pages and have fixed the references up for you. The code for a reference is <ref>[(url)]</ref>, and the article numbers them automatically. You can also do <ref>[(url) (caption)]</ref> (with a space between the url and the caption), then in the reference list at the bottom they'll come up with captions next to them. To make the reference list show you'll need to put a {{reflist}} tag somewhere in the article, generally under a "references" or "references and external links" header. Hope this helps! - Zeibura S. Kathau ^{(Info | Talk)} 10:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Multiple uses of the same reference

Hi there. I saw your request for help in the edit summary to the article you recently created. You can name your references for use later on in the article. Use the wikitext <ref name="Reference Name">http://www.....</ref> for the first use of the reference. The next time you need to refer to that reference, just use the simpler, <ref name="Reference Name" /> wikitext. The backslash at the end of the ref tag is important, don't forget it. If you have more questions, you can read up at Wikipedia:Footnotes. See you around. Sancho 07:40, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Nice job with the well referenced article creation... a rare occurrence it seems. As a matter of style, it will be an improvement to the article if you moved the placement of the footnote tags to be at the end of the sentences, after the punctuation. Wikipedia:Footnotes#Where_to_place_ref_tags describes this well. Sancho 07:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rosselli-Gulienetti syndrome

Hi there - just thought I'd say congrats on a very well-written page. MackSalmon (Talk) 11:39, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arthrogryposis

Dear Calaka! I think you're doing a great job so please feel free to make the redirects. I'm really overwhelmed because of my works on the medicine portal, medicine project and the collaborations. If you don't know how to make one, let me know. NCurse _work 15:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Expand Tag Queries

Can you help me understand how you are selecting articles for your recent [1] spree of tagging articles with the {{Expand}} tag? Thanks! Sdsds 04:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, you need to either mention why on the talk page or on the expansion requests page (preferably both I assume) -- Chsf 10:44, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Re:Leduc County, Alberta: There's a few hundred pages about counies, municipal districts, rural municipalites and regional districts in western Canada, the large majority in stub or start class. For many, there's little to say, as information about the included municipalities (towns, villages, reserves, hamlets) belong to sub-pages. However, specific info can be found and added to the article, if only one knew what to look for, so if you are looking for specific facts, please ask. But placing an {{expand}} tag on top of every stub page just for the sake of it is not helping in any way. --Qyd 14:54, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for the message. Well, there is a certain amount of subjectivity in determining when a tag (of any kind) might be necessary, unless it is a clear-cut case (e.g., one-line stubs), but normally, we place a article-wide expansion-request tag (meaning, the one at the top of article, as opposed to expansion requests that are placed only at the top of specific sections — this tag may be used) only when it is a topic clearly underdeveloped. I believe that the biographic article for that actress is not one in that state. There may not be too much to add about that person without resourcing to fancruft, rumors, etc. — I have that article watchlisted precisely to help keep this sort of thing in check. That's not to say that the article is perfect as it is, in fact quite the opposite: there may be quite a lot of room for improvement, but I don't believe that a general expansion request at the top would help us reach this goal; as a matter of fact it could encourage people to write in all kinds of unencyclopedic contents, since it would be expanding the article. For that one, if we had to tag it, it would possibly be a {{cleanup}} tag or some other tag that would appeal to improving the general quality of the article. Expansion tags could be considered for certain sections of it, although again, clean up and other structural improvements would probably be what the article needs in order to improve really, and not so much expansion. That is, of course, my own assessment of the article's situation. Cheers, Redux 21:19, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
On my talk page you wrote "feel free to check the other 100?!" Actually, I did check many of them. In some cases I agreed, and in many other cases I had no basis for judgment. Keep up the good work. --orlady 03:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Qxz-ads

You aren't using the ads correctly. You are NOT supposed to directly load the pictures. Instead, use the template {{Qxz-ads}}, like this:


Wikipedia Ads	file info – show another – #40

--Andrew Hampe ^Talk 15:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Fixed it for you. --Andrew Hampe ^Talk 15:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] stubsensor award

Hi Calaka, thanks for all your help with the stubsensor. :-) I've noticed you've completed a lot of sections and I'd like to offer a small token of appreciation. I hope you enjoy the stubsensor award. Triddle 21:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Great Job

Great Job on stub sensor! Jeepday (talk) 13:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Your welcome, I am starting a new project Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles drop by and take a look. Jeepday (talk) 02:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism related:

[edit] Response to your comments

No problem reverting the vandalism on the article. As for warning about this problem, I don't know what to do. To be honest, I am pretty new here and still learning the ropes. That was my first revert! :) --Crohnie 12:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your Welcome

It was the Oompapa sockpuppet and I noticed it in his contribs, we hard to work hard to keep him (or her) away from Wikipedia, your welcome for the revert! Telly addict 15:32, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Those troll edits

That troll user left 4 barnstars on my user page and I noticed that the account was only created an hour before. It looked suspicious to me. I then noticed he/she was leaving stars on many other pages. When an admin blocked it as a troll, I figured I should revert all the edits before anyone got attached to the awards. The only reason I got to it so fast was because I had the Anti-Vandal tool monitoring my watchlist (kind of as a test) while I was doing something else. By the way, anyone can give out Barnstars.-- Mufka ^(user) ^(talk) ^(contribs) 14:57, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Medicine Collaboration of the Month:

Thank you for your support of the Medicine Collaboration of the Week.
This week Vitamin C was selected.
Hope you can help…

NCurse _work 18:56, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of the Medicine Collaboration of the Week.
This week Oncogene was selected.
Hope you can help…

NCurse _work 06:02, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of the Medicine Collaboration of the Week.
This week Transcription factor was selected.
Hope you can help…

NCurse _work 15:58, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Exam wishes

Good luck with the exams - Skysmith 06:50, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back. I hope the exams went well - Skysmith 09:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anatomy assessment

I've set up a couple just following the existing examples - I could do it now if you'd be prepared to help set up the categories after I change the template. Recoding the template should only take a few minutes, but it might be half an hour or so to get all the categories sorted out. Richard001 06:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, check out Template:WikiProject Anatomy - It's set up for assessments now but all the categories the articles will be placed in are ghosts, as is the assessment page. They don't have to be set up immediately, but take a look at other projects to see how they work.

Category:WikiProject Ecology articles for example shows how they are split into two criteria - quality and importance. Each article goes in both categories, and each of them are broken into the various ratings given. The parent category is then placed in the WikiProject's own category. On each page you should add:

And for individual categories for a given class or importance add a template like this:

They have one template for class and one for importance (seen above).

See also WP:Assessment, and let me know if you need any help. Richard001 07:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

No no, what I mean is these need to be placed on the category pages (look for the red links at the bottom of the talk page where you added the assessment). By adding this to the category page and in turn categorizing it (see the other projects for guidance) you can set up the foundations of an assessment scheme. Richard001 08:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

You just forgot to categorize the by importance and by quality categories themselves; don't worry, I've done that for you. Thanks for helping me out, now everyone is better off (including you and me!) Richard001 10:40, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Leonardo da Vinci

There is more info about Leonardo's studies of anatomy at Leonardo da Vinci - scientist and inventor. I think that article should be listed as of high importance and the biographical and general article of mid importance perhaps. --Amandajm 06:41, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] stubsensor feedback

Hello, could you please let me know how you would gauge the performance of stubsensor on this run? Since you'll have your hands in it more than I do, you'll have a more accurate picture of how stubsensor behaved on this run. Seems to me it made *a lot* of mistakes this time, mostly related to identifying articles as stubs that don't even have the stub tag. :-/ In any case, if you could let me know how you thought the performance was, and what page number and sections you were working on, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks :-) Triddle 16:40, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to the 1.0 Editorial Team

Hi Calaka, and welcome to the team. It looks from your comments that you would fit in well over at WP:WVWP, but by all means take a look at the other sub-projects at WP:1.0. Your help with the medical content on WP:V0.7 would also be welcome; NCurse was a valuable contributor/reviewer of medical articles for Version 0.5, our first release, you may know him. This recent article gives a pretty thorough description of where we are. Please ask if there's anything you're unsure about. Thanks, Walkerma 05:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unreferenced

I see you've tagged some articles {{unreferenced}} today. Given that you are a member of the medical WikiProjects, would you agree that it would be helpful to alert fellow members that these articles are indeed unreferenced? Often, other contributors will have no difficulty at all in finding suitable sourced from their personal collections. Cheers. JFW | T@lk 11:02, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2002 Women's Champions Trophy (field hockey), etc

When considering stub status of an article it is not just the amount of text in the article but you must also consider how much more encyclopedic content could be or is likely to be added. In the example (one of many) 2002 Women's Champions Trophy (field hockey) is child article of Hockey Champions Trophy so most of the content about the subject is there. If further expansion of the article requires college education or fundamental understandings of the concepts then the expand template is probably the best choice. If you beleive that more encyclopedic content is readily available to be added to the an article then by all means reverse my decision to remove stub tags. If you beleive that the article is to short to provide encyclopedic and more content is not readily available you might want to consider WP:CSD or {{Prod-nn}} rather then replacing the stub tag. If the article provides good basic coverage but would require substantial research to expand you might want to consider {{expand}}. In the future if you believe that an editor is making editorial choices that are not in keeping with Wikipedia expectations rather then reviewing their contribution list and quietly reverting the decisions you don't agree with, bring it up with them on their talk page, one or both editors might learn from the experience. Jeepday (talk) 14:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Response at User talk:Jeepday#Re stubsensor related Jeepday (talk) 14:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AR1

Yes, some of these requests should be moved to WP:AR2, but only a "higher up" like an admin can move such things. Bearian 00:02, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Medicine topics update.

Yes, the Missing Topics page about Medicine has become rather unwieldy. I'm in the proces of trying to determine what topics could be fixed with redirects, but as of this writing I was in geology (although I update the pages in a different rate).

However, you keep studying and maybe cure somebody one of these days, pal :-) - Skysmith 19:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for the welcome

It was quite appreciated. Namaps (talk) 03:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Message

Hello, Calaka. You have new messages at Steve Crossin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} template.

[edit] Village pump fracas

I think I'll stay clear of that page for now. I've stated the case and the opposing parties such as Lindsay fail to see how much of a crime it would be to stop wikipedia developing and expect me to welcome them lovingly without attempting to address their concerns. They have their view, I have mine, but many of the people who have posted their views at the page are the ones who do little work on developing the actual encyclopedia but spend most of their editing time in such debates. I've concentrated on the mainspace encyclopedia for years trying to avoid such discussions as much as possible and I have been astounded how uneven wikipedia is in places and still believe it is an important step to make ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 15:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Mmm I agree, yes consulting the wikiprojects is good but I think you'll find most of the African ones aren't active, most were set up to encourage people to join and to tag the articles. This whole thing has illustrated profndly the bias towards America that exists and the general ignorance of the developing world. Im different in that I try to picture the world as if you are in that place and if people studied these countries they would be astounded by the vast missing content ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 09:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree, I 've just been reading your comments. I also think it is possible to have a fuller article on a town in the developing world if we can have fuller articles on small neighbiurhoods of cities. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 09:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The strnage thing is that people think none of them will ever be expanded. This ia wiki is it not and changes can be made within seconds. According to Ryan "In my opinion, absolutely no encyclopedic benefit would arise from this project". How narrow minded is that? ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 09:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes totally. If we could generate pages with five or six lines anybody who would still reject the idea when it has encyclopedic benefit should seriously consider reevaluating what this site is about. Sure geography might dominate for some time, but there snothing stopping other departments (like Nature) etc developing if they are sensible and work more efficiently. At the end of the day we all want quality articles but we have to make some sort of a step to actually create the articles first for future growth. There is a gigantic amount of potential good content missing and a bot is the only way to achieve these goals and provide the groundwork for humans to write article on. Once we have a fuller content and uneveness addressed I can begin to concentrate on writng articles rather than spending all my time creating them. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 10:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Would you mind stopping your edits to the village pump page? Fritzpoll has asked that we cease arguing about this one, so he can take in comments and come back with an improved, hopefully less-contentious proposal. Continuing to post there is not constructive.--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi yes thats right, leave the uncertain ones at the top which are difficult to dab from the same district. I'm looking into getting an American Samoa pin map created before it starts though. Feel free to start on Anguilla,Thanks ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 11:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Well Ofu is the village so really that could be seperate from the article on the island. It would be rather like Cowes being redirected to Isle of Wight otherwise ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 11:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

There we go. New article created from the missing list Ar Rifa`. Errrr non notables towns . Bot is TERRRRIBLE. Do people actually relaise we ar emissing entire cities!! ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 11:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh trust me there are thousands of articles missing that size in Africa and parts of Asia some of them missing still have over 100,000 people. The majority are likely to be large villages with a population of around 800 though but even these are of note and a lot can be written about them. Yesterday I cam across Montaillou with a population of 14 and it isn't a sub stub. If people bothered to actually get out there and reseach these places properly we'd have an encyclopedia without stubs on all places regardless of size and country. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 11:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Likely to be a task force of WP:Cities rather than a seperate project ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 12:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Samoa project

The Samoa, project already is, effectively, a subproject of Polynesia, as it uses the Polynesia banner and all articles assessed for it are also automatically assessed for Polynesia as well. The only reason it and several of the other comparatively inactive national WikiProjects were created were to ensure that they use the extant banner, rather than having some other party come along later, create the project on their own, splatter that project's banner hither and yon, and then require someone else to remove the banner when the project was created or merged into a larger project. I do note that the American Samoa project does have its own separate banner right now, and probably will add its assessments to the Polynesia banner and turn the extant American Samoa banner into a redirect to the Polynesia banner. John Carter (talk) 17:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.