User talk:Thierry613

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Cf. fr:Discussion utilisateur:Thierry613


7 Groups of Anti-Gravity Flying Devices[edit]

Hi!

Just FYI: I noticed you added Category:Gravity, then removed it and added Category:Science fiction. While I'm not familiar with most of the last names included in this resource, I am familiar with Dr. Robert L. Forward. Here's one of his references: "Robert L. Forward, "Guidelines to Antigravity," American Journal of Physics 31 (3) 166-170 (1963)." retrieved by Google Scholar. The American Journal of Physics does not publish science fiction. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 23:47, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Oups ! Sorry ! Sometimes I'm really too fast. Don't hesitate to correct my mistakes. And thanks for you remark. --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 12:12, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Do you agree with Category:Gravitation ? --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 12:18, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Seems okay! If you're interested, check out some of the other last names on Google Scholar with one of the key words like "anti-gravity". --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 23:33, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
I looked at Google Scholar. Anti-gravity is no more a SF theme at all. Smiley.svg --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 10:10, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

The invisible DNA[edit]

An article with a six-year / 40-edit history can't be deleted for vandalism. It can be moved to user space, made a subpage, tagged for proposed deletion, or tagged for deletion discussion, but it isn't vandalism and can't be deleted outright. You also shouldn't delete anything that might be interpreted as a conflict of interest. You've already expressed concern regarding this editor, so just tagging for deletion and letting someone else address it would be a better approach. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 20:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

OK. Sorry. I thought it could be considered as vandalism as it has already been deleted some years ago (June 2010, https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=The+invisible+DNA)... --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 20:30, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
I saw that but I am having difficulty following the history. The page doesn't show up in the new page log. Was the page recreated today or simply updated today? --
I don't know at all. --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 21:50, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
I just tried a test. Deleting a page removes the N! entry from Recent changes and removes the page from the New Pages log. Undeleting that page does not restore it to the new log. Based on dates and times, I suspect that the page was recreated today, and when you deleted it, all record of it being created today was lost, making it appear to be a change rather than a new page. I'll update the RFD. Sorry for the confusion. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 23:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
You should not (be sorry). First of all, I did not have to delete the page as roughly as I did. Smiley.svg --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 07:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Table of Contents on the right & other stuffs[edit]

I've been studying your suggested changes of putting {{TOCright}} to reduce excess space and allow the text to flow more cleanly for the readers. The pages without images at the top seem okay so far. But, those with images turn out looking much better by putting {{TOCright}} just after the image for the page. As an example, take a look at Astronomy/Balloons. Removing the {{clear}} after the first section does allow the TOC to extend down into the next few sections nicely while eliminating large open spaces to keep the text vertical on the left and reading more easily. What do you think?

You're so right ! It is much better with the TOC after the image ; I will try to remember. But if there are pages where the TOC on the right does not fit at all, please don't hesitate to remove it.

Also, an earlier contributor suggested having templates such as {{article}} and {{lecture}} down at the bottom so they would not interrupt the flow of the introductory text. I like this contributor's suggestion. What are your reasons for moving these back to the top right as in Languages?

It seemed to me that the lector would be interested to know immediately what sort of page he is going to read. But if you are annoyed with that or if it causes flow problems, I will stop to move these templates.

BTW I also appreciate your efforts to try to deal with our multiple language categories. Wikipedia (which we are not missioned to be or be like) usually uses the single form of a word, e.g., language which differentiates it from say art. I like using the plurals such as languages because it differentiates us from Wikipedia. Also, language or languages have their roots in concepts like phonemes, grammemes, lexemes, and morphemes, among others. Is there a more fundamental concept than say languages that could serve as a root category?

Well, it is a big question. As far as I know, in english, the plural is preferred for keywords or category names. As a french native, I have not the habit of this usage but I can handle with. In most classification, "Language" or "Languages" or "Linguistics & Languages", etc. is a root category for all stuffs of that kind. But the actuel state of categories let me discouraged most of the time. It is like a big plate of spaghettis, as I can guess that, since several years, a lot of persons have donne their own cooking each in their corner. And it will be a big deal to put all in order...

In Languages I noticed you removed {{anthropology}}, {{geography}}, {{history}}, {{humanities}}, {{Communication}}, {{Linguistics}}, and {{semantics}}. As I recall these are subject templates. While I have no preference one way or the other for using or not using these, when I started here they seemed to be in popular use. What are your opinions for removing them now? --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 23:52, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

There is several points (which of course can be discussed) :
  • These templates automatically add the page to all the concerned categories. I suppose it was the initial goal. But IMHO, it adds confusion in the hierarchical category tree.
  • While all these subjects (languages, anthropology, etc.), as human activities, are obviously bound together, I don't think it is relevant to bind their corresponding categories.
I hope I have answered to your questions. Or at least begun to answer...
The last point (and the global logic of the categories tree) is a very important point and maybe it would be usefull and more efficient to ask Dave Braunschweig and the entire community their opinions and wishes. I don't want to impose my own way and process. It could be very useful for my when I process and clean categories. --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 13:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I've been thinking about it. The top category is Category:Categories. Some of these like Category:Years might be better under Category:History for example. It's worth a try to place a plan on the Colloquium to see who responds with what suggestions. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 13:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
OK for me. --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 14:18, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Music compositions[edit]

I have created a resource entitled Compositions that is designed to describe various kinds of compositions from a simple, general theory expressed by definitions of the word composition. One of the sections is about music composition (not how to compose music, but those constituents or elements which compose it). Please have a look and feel free to comment, criticize, suggest, or list components. We've been discussing this resource on its Discuss page. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 01:50, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes; I will take a look at it ! --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 09:12, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Brown Recluse Spider[edit]

Hi I added a page wondering if its acceptable? Thank you. --Moogy9282 (discusscontribs) 15:10, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution. --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 18:08, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Little wikibreak[edit]

Until June 12th.

--Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 22:19, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Enjoy! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 23:57, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks ! I'm back, but I won't be very active these days. --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 11:10, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Problème catégories non vides : C'est normal ?[edit]

Salut, j'ai vu que tu avais renommé les deux premières Special:WantedCategories, puis supprimé le nouvel emplacement car vide... Alors que tout est sur l'ancien :

JackPotte (discusscontribs) 09:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Il y aurait celle-là aussi stp : Category:All pages needing to be wikified. JackPotte (discusscontribs) 20:31, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Excuse-moi, je n'ai pas très bien compris ta question. --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 16:06, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Content de te revoir par ici. En gros, tu as supprimé des catégories qui ne sont pas vides sans dire pourquoi, du coup elles apparaissent dans la maintenance. Donc si c'était à cause d'un déplacement temporaire par exemple, n'hésite pas à les restaurer :-). JackPotte (discusscontribs) 16:55, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Normalement, si j'ai supprimé des catégories non vides, je les ai "remplacées" par d'autres. Mais une erreur est toujours possible. Je vais vérifier. --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 16:44, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Peut-être qu'il s'est produit la même chose qu'avec celle-ci dont les pages ont été redéplacées : Category:Software Development Refresher Course. JackPotte (discusscontribs) 22:32, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
C'est bien possible... --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 17:47, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Motivation and emotion/Book[edit]

Hi Thierry613, I'm working through fixing up a bunch of changes I think you made in April to this project. May be a good idea to check-in before making such a large number of changes. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:13, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm finding category changes within this project too - Survey research and design in psychology. Please discuss before going ahead with recategorisation. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:35, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the mistakes. Normally, I have finished with categories cleaning. I have now a lot of familial problems which don't let me so much time for working on Wikiversity. I hope I will have more time soon. Thanks. --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 16:48, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Maintenance[edit]

Something else you might be interested in. There are pages in the Wikiversity: namespace that aren't about Wikiversity. Would you be willing to look through them whenever you have time and tag them for move, delete, prod, etc.? They can be found using Special:PrefixIndex/Wikiversity:. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 21:12, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

OK. --Thierry613 (discusscontribs) 20:16, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

  1. This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.