This archive covers up to the end of 2012. Topics include Pending changes/Flagged revisions, Version 0.8, Chemistry image validation, YuviPanda's GSoC project for WP1.0, menthol elimination, WP1.0 release version tools, Wikimania 2012. For other talk page archives see User talk:Walkerma/Archives. Other close archives include: Archive10 — Archive11 — Archive12 — Archive13 — Archive14 — Archive15 — Archive16 — Archive17 — Archive18 — Archive19 — Archive20 — Archive21 — Archive22 — Archive23 — Archive24 — Archive25 — Archive27 — Archive28 — Archive29

Hey

I just chanced upon a new user, OrgSyn (talk · contribs), who is supposed to be from the journal. I mentioned that there are some ways they can help us. Maybe you'd like to take a look? --Rifleman 82 (talk) 03:39, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Walkerma, I got your name from the Editorial Team participant list, and wanted to tell you that we will be testing out assessment metrics in the Wikiproject: United States Public Policy, and I was hoping you would be interested in assessing articles with the Public Policy Initiative. There is more info about assessment on the 9/13/2010 Signpost. If you're interested or just curious you can sign up on the project page or just contact me. Thanks! ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 21:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Various people have been providing input at the V0.8 page following the bot's notification of the projects. I've not seen any response from the build project yet. COuld you please confirm that you will provided it either on the talk page or at individual WikiProjects?--Peter cohen (talk) 19:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for checking in. I replied to one so far, but I was going to start working through replies tonight in more detail. The place I reply will depend on the specifics - I will typically reply at the WikiProject if (a) the proposal is by one person, without obvious discussion in-project or (b) once the proposal is judged (by me) to be closed. I will also be trying to recruit a couple of experienced 1.0 people to help review these, but in the past this part of the process has usually fallen mainly to me...! Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 20:41, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Martin for the prompt reply.--Peter cohen (talk) 21:34, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Since the links to look at the articles don't seem to work, or at least [1] doesn't provide anything useful to the average editor and [2] doesn't work at all, will you be giving more time so these articles can be scrutinised? Dougweller (talk) 13:19, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the former is of little use to the average editor, but the second link works just fine for me. The second one should give you everything you need - links to the current and the selected versions, the assesments and score for each article, and you can even look at metadata (links in, interwiki links, no. of page hits) if you choose to. Sometimes the toolserver is a bit slow - could you try a couple more times and get back to me if you still have problems? Thanks for reporting this, Walkerma (talk) 15:46, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

It's working now, thanks. I tried it several times earlier and it wasn't working. Dougweller (talk) 15:52, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Just a note to say thanks for reviewing my Aviation WP article suggestions. I understand why they have not been chosen and am happy to leave selection of articles to those who are familiar with the process. Mjroots (talk) 18:27, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! I appreciate your comment - it's a very hard job, because I know people can get disappointed or even upset by our selections. What we could do (if people are interested) is work with WP:Aviation on producing a specific selection of articles from WP:Aviation, which people could either download (e.g., for their mobile phone) or buy as a book. There would certainly be a place for good articles like these on interesting topics, in a more specialised selection. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 19:56, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, am interested to know if there is a specific deadline or something you guys are working on to get 0.8 out? If yes, any place where I can follow the progress (apart from the wiki page) , maybe a mass mail/newsletter announcing to the world when 0.8 is out would do world of good. Even if you have some test releases out to work out any chinks (if there are any or something like that) it would be a good idea. I have been looking at it for more than 6 months and there hardly seems any progress happening. Looking forward your comment on the same. Shirishag75 (talk) 16:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Not a hard deadline, but at our IRC I said I would try to get the manual reviews done by the end of the month (i.e., this coming weekend). I'm doing this part alone, and it's quite labour intensive, so I just have to work through it. We are aiming to have the collection ready to go out on the internet and out into shops (probably only in France) by November 21st, but they need about three weeks for all the technical stuff (preparing ZIM files, checking copyrights, etc.).

Version 0.8 is the test release - the "actual" release (1.0)will probably be in 2011. I've actually started this blog recently for information on the offline work, because I do see a need for something like this off-wiki. But since I am personally holding up the release date, I hesitate to take time away from the manual reviewing to post on it this week! Because of your request, though, I'll write a quick post tonight. We are planning publicity in the Signpost, the Wikimedia Foundation blog, etc, but since this is only a pilot release we're not blowing trumpets - we will save that for the launch of 1.0 next year. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 21:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Blog post, as promised! Walkerma (talk) 05:51, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I think I may have found a solution on the Immaculate Conception article. The deadline is October 11th?Malke 2010 (talk) 00:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that's the deadline for when we want to finish feedback from WikiProjects. We will in fact still be finishing off processing the results from that for a few days after that. I'm praying that we'll have some divine intervention, so that references and balanced prose will suddenly appear without any apparent edits....! Walkerma (talk) 22:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'm working on the Immaculate Conception article with another editor. The biggest thing is the sources. Also, on the Catholic Church, here is the article when it was at GA status. Miracle of miracles. Please use this one: [3]. Even the pictures are nice.Malke 2010 (talk) 00:47, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

There may be sourcing issues with that version. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Catholic Church and related talkpage discussions from around that time period before restoring a 2-year-old version. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:46, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Walkerma. You have new messages at Parent5446's talk page.
Message added 03:33, 24 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

About this. [4]

Articles which are also in foreign languages can be included on the left side of any page under the "languages" drop-down menu, with the proper wiki tags. It's redundant to keep one Russian article linked at the bottom. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 22:12, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry - my mistake! For some reason, I thought the Russian link had been completely removed. I've apologized to the person who originally removed the redundant link. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 12:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, just returned from a longer vacation where I was 100% offline and can look at it soon if it is not too late. What is the deadline? Richiez (talk) 10:26, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I have looked through the breast cancer article with several small fixes. So for example http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Breast_cancer&oldid=396699438 should be reasonably good, but perhaps there is still some time to wait for stabilisation? Richiez (talk) 13:41, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, we still have a few days. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 14:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I am doing little edits as I have time, pick any of my revisions when time comes. Richiez (talk) 18:35, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

If it still matters this version has a few tidied up formulations. Richiez (talk) 00:21, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it does matter - I've updated it. Thanks! Walkerma (talk) 03:48, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

.. is done. We can now unambiguously link uploaded images on commons to en.wikipedia chem- and drugboxes, and the pages under influence will be changed when a file on commons gets overwritten. See some test edits in the history of Benzene. It was easier than I expected. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 14:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Re Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Venezuela#Venezuela_articles_have_been_selected_for_the_Wikipedia_0.8_release - is it too late to respond to your question now? Rd232 ^talk 17:06, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Potassium prep.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:07, 23 November 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:07, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Dear Walkerma, Best wishes to you and your family this holiday season, whether you are celebrating Christmas or a different holiday. It's a special time of the year for almost everyone, and there's always a reason to spread the holiday spirit! ;) Love, --Meaghan [talk] ≈ 14:29, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Martin, I saw this weekend your post on the imagindex. Your first concern is actually a big bot-bug. I have resolved it, but now the format of the index has changed, from:

benzene.jpg=1234

to

benzene.jpg=1234@Benzene

In this way, we know which revid is used on which page. The bot has already been adapted to use this format. Do you have a quick list of which images are on which pages? I started, and will continue, to do some (the old numbers will now be largely ignored ...) All the best, and happy indexing. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I have a full list (I think), and I'll start adding them when I get a chance. I'm working on other things this week, but will return to the image validation work next week some time. MANY THANKS for getting this sorted so easily! Walkerma (talk) 21:39, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of March. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 50. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, we hope we can see you in March. MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 23:56, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Walkerma, I saw your comment over at Talk:The_Three_Musketeers#Auguste_Maquet because I was hunting for the same exact thing. I, unfortunately, do not have any literary information about Maquet's contributions to The Three Musketeers. Would you still happen to have that biography on you? If you don't, would you mind repeating the title for me, and I will try to locate it? – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 04:27, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The book I read is listed as one of the general references for Dumas fils. It is

• Maurois, André (1957). The Titans, a three-generation biography of the Dumas. trans. by Gerard Hopkins. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers. OCLC 260126.

I have the book on the shelf next to my bed, I really must have a go at doing that! The book makes it clear that they collaborated for much of Dumas pere's career, and that Dumas regarded Maquet as a major contributor to his work - so when Dumas went on his travels, he often had Maquet travel with him. That's why I was astonished that the WP article never even mentioned him. Their relationship was cordial for most of the time, though they had one point when they fell out - I think Maquet filed a lawsuit to get a bigger share of the money from the Three Musketeers - but they seem to have become friends again once it blew over. BTW, I'm a chemist, but I read a lot, and in this case I feel it's a very important topic that has a surprisingly weak article. (Alexandre Dumas gets around half a million hits per year, and The Three Musketeers gets around 1.5 million.) I didn't want to plunge in as an ignorant scientist without getting some feedback from the literary community, so I'm glad that I may be on the right track! Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 05:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't know any of that! Thank you so much for listing the book. My reading list is lengthy (as it always is), but I may bump this one up. That is definitely extremely important information for any of those articles: Dumas's, Maquet's, and of course the novels themselves. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 06:22, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

You'll enjoy it - it's a very well-written biography of a very colourful character, but also very well-researched by the French author. Have fun, Walkerma (talk) 07:14, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I managed to find it at my library; it should come in in a short while. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 08:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

You built alloxan, and recently other people rewrote things on its effects on diabetes. Do you accept the changes? If not, edit it yourself.--133.9.4.11 (talk) 06:08, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Your silence caused edit warring, although we understand it is NOT your fault. Anyway, PLEASE intervene.--133.9.4.11 (talk) 05:43, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure I can - I know nothing about the issues involved. I did look at the page, and the edits didn't seem unreasonable. I'm an organic chemist - my only contribution to that page was to check the CAS Registry number. If there is a problem, it would be best to raise it with WP:PHARM, as they have editors who know about drugs and their action. Sorry I can't help more. Walkerma (talk) 07:44, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'm the right person for that - sorry! I consider myself more of a supporter of the Council, rather than an active participant. I'm also not sure if any of the original founders are still active - but Kirill would be a good person to talk to, since he was the most responsible (as I recall) for setting it up. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 05:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Heya! Thanks for your support :)

I've modified my diagram to take into account Carl's comments. The new one is here: http://min.us/mPagEBe0tIasX#1 :) Yuvi (talk) 12:29, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Heya! Just a note saying I've been accepted for GSoC, and it'd be awesome if we could talk about how the current process is done. You on IRC Anytime? Yuvi (talk) 20:54, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Great news! I'm really pleased. As for IRC, we can meet on #wikipedia-1.0, but what time zone are you in? If you're in the US Pacific Time Zone, then late tomorrow afternoon (your time) would probably be a good time for me. If not, then maybe Saturday some time. I'm in the US Eastern Time Zone. If you have Skype, we could do that if you prefer. Jessie Wild did a really nice new page about offline releases, and she describes the process here. I think I may have mentioned a page I did here. Congratulations, Walkerma (talk) 01:42, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I saw you are/were involved in indexing Wikipedia 0.7. I skimmed an article on Wayne Shorter indexed under Buddhism. It seemed to me a clearly inappropriate placement. Can you remove it. I don't know how. <ARRust (talk) 16:13, 24 May 2011 (UTC)>

Unfortunately, with an offline release everything is fixed once it is published, and 0.7 came out a year or two back. I think this problem arose because someone began tagging biographical articles for WP:BUDDHA if the person was (at some point) a Buddhist. The Shorter article mentions that he is a Buddhist (see the personal life section. For 0.8, someone from the Buddhism project spotted that Courtney Love was tagged in this way, so we corrected that, but we depend on individual WikiProjects to tag articles appropriately. (I personally can't sit down and read 30-50,000 articles and make those judgements!) I know the person who tagged the article (he is a great asset to Wikipedia!) - I think it was just an honest mistake on his part, so I've left a note for him regarding this and the other "possibly mis-tagged" articles. Once he responds, we can work with WP:BUDDHA to make sure that this article and any similar mistakes are corrected before we do our next release. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 21:40, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Wayne Shorter and Courtney Love are still both categorized as American Buddhists and members of Soka Gakkai. Although the tagging was done by cutting and pasting the banners, not AWB, yeah, the tagging was, pretty much, done based on the categorization. There are and remain serious questions regarding whether these categorizations should be used as often as they are, and that is a question for a lot of religion projects, and a lot of national, regional, and other projects as well. I'm personally not at all sure how to deal with these issues, except, maybe, on the talk pages of the articles to see if the editors involved believe that the categorization is appropriate. If it isn't, then the banner, clearly, wouldn't be either.

Less active right now because I'm going through the Infotrac databank to find the various "encyclopedic" and dictionary type sources out there, by running a full text search on the words. Once I get the material together, I think it might help a lot of the groups to both determine what articles they want to tag, as well as which articles they still need. Unfortunately, there are about 50,000 reviews on that databank alone, of I think about 10,000 books, so it is taking a while to go through all the articles and citations to see which are really useful, and which are just articles which just mention, for instance, the OED in some trivial way. John Carter (talk) 16:17, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

A deletion discussion has just been created at Category talk:Unclassified Chemical Structures, which may involve one or more orphaned chemical structures, that has you user name in the upload history. Please feel free to add your comments.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:09, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi

I would like to notify a mistake in the file "Menthol reactions.png" created by you. The elimination reaction of menthol leads to product inconsistent with the Zaitsev rule because the sterochemistry of this reaction requires trans arrangement to crate antiperiplanar transition state. Presented situation would be appropriate for neomenthol. Regards --Danielchemik (talk) 00:23, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, the reaction goes via an E1 mechanism (it forms the carbocation), so the antiperiplanar rule doesn't apply. This also consistent with ref 8, which is where I got most of the reactions from. But I'm really glad people are scrutinising my work - I'm very capable of making silly mistakes! Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 00:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

I think the product is consistent with Zaitsev, which says "more substituted alkene" and nothing about the geometric orientation of H vs LG. I'll have to see if I can find a ref for the Hofmann elimination reaction for menthol--it's a great substrate for many different kinds of reactions. The more interesting case to my mind (and confusing to my students!) is the chlorination with retention of stereochemistry (Phosphorus pentachloride is silent on that issue). I'll check for the normal SN2 case too as comparison. DMacks (talk) 01:00, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

I cannot agree with You. If the reaction would go via an E1 mechanism the mixture of isomers should contain a higher percentage of the other one (than preseneted), beacuse the proton neighboring to isopropyl group is more cover than protons of methylene group. Furtheremore, if the E1 mechanism occured probably the rearangement product would be also arise. Anyway, I looked in many books and I found similar exaple in Clayden, Greeves, Warren and Wohers "Organic Chemistry" Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-850346-0, pp. 492-493, where is clearly written that this reaction with Cl substituent (I think even better living group than OH) E1 mechanism is excluded. The example presented in this book shows the neomenthol elimination leading to 1:3 mixture of products, but for menthol only the isomer of double bond between 2 and 4 o'clock carbons is created. In principle the reaction is one of the exceptions to Zaitsev rule. Greetings --Danielchemik (talk) 23:05, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Certainly exceptions to Zaitzev are known, for various reasons depending on the substrate. However, I don't understand "the proton...is more cover". If you are talking about steric hindrance, that is not usually an important effect for E1 reactions (that's the whole point of Zaitzev). With strong acid, the leaving group of menthol is OH_{2⁺, which is better than Cl (true that OH is a poor LG without protonation), and lots of rearrangements could happen. I don't know what conditions Clayden/etc use, but if it's at all concerted (not E1), then certainly the 2/4-o'clock is the less hindered result...expected as usual for E2.}

As an interesting example illustrating that rearrangement does occur is doi:10.1021/ja01235a019. Dehydration of menthol using Lewis-acid at high temp in polar-protic solvent (sounds like classic E1 conditions) and claims to get 2-methyl-5-isopropyl-1-cyclohexene as the major product (that would have the alkene at noon/2-o'clock)--I don't see the thermodynamic or kinetic advantage here vs other possibilities. I guess we need Walkerma to verify the ref the used. DMacks (talk) 23:38, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

The reaction result isn't based on speculation by me - I'm simply reporting what the literature (Simonsen) reports, and I certainly couldn't predict the >90%. The major product is Zaitsev. I'm away from home at the moment, so I'll have to wait till I get home to confirm it. Also, there is a huge difference between a reaction of an alcohol in sulfuric acid (which HAS to go via cationic intermediates anyway) and a reaction of a chloro compound which must go E2. I presume you're not proposing that a secondary alcohol is unable to go E1 in sulfuric acid! The lack of a rearrangement product, the tetrasubstituted alkene, may be due to the fact that endocyclic DBs (as in the product) are typically more stable than exocyclic DBs (the rearr product), and that may offset the effect of the added substitution.

I used to run a lab experiment(which I developed myself) using menthyl chloride, neomenthyl bromide and menthyl methanesulfonate; under the conditions we used (usually DBU), all three tended to give 3-menthene (based on NMR) as the major product, which was very annoying to me, because I was trying to get a lab that showed the antiperiplanar rule! I had to speculate that under those conditions, at the high temperatures we used (to get the reaction done quickly enough for a lab period) it went E1 despite by best efforts to get E2; the other (less likely) possibility is a syn E2 elimination, which is rare but possible with a higher Eact. The anti E2 requires both the isopropyl and the methyl groups to go axial, which raises the Eact, so that may make the E1 a little more favoured. When I get some time, I'll go back and review the literature some more. Instead, I switched to a "safe" lab where they dehydrate 2-methylcyclohexanol with phosphoric acid; in that case it gives a nice mixture of 3-methylcyclohexene (major) and 1-methylcyclohexene (minor) as predicted by Zaitsev and E1; we never see even a trace or rearrangement product (methylenecyclohexane). Anyway, I'll confirm it when I get home. Walkerma (talk) 00:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Heya! I do have a timeline setup here (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Yuvipanda/GSoC/Timeline). In a few weeks or so, I'll hopefully have something I can show off in a test-wiki :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yuvipanda (talk • contribs) 16:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I've already shared it with a few people, and I've added some comments on the talk page. Walkerma (talk) 06:17, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

As I understand the next version will be 0.9? I updated the pages accordingly. Ruslik_Zero 16:11, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

How to get the quality annotation of each articles which forms the following table? Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Statistics I want to try some informative retrieval technologies to automatically assess the quality of articles, such as search engines, summarization. My first difficult is how to get the quality annotation of each article. I have read and sticked to the FAQ for a couple of days, but still can not figure to do it. I have downloaded the latest dumps and count the pages carrying the tag of ``Featured article``, but it only results in about 2000 articles, much less than the expected number of 3000. Could you please be kind enough to give me some hints? Thanks. By the way, I am glad to help in Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. Arthur.xl.wang (talk) 03:46, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

First of all - thanks for the offer to help with the 1.0 team. Although things have been quiet on-wiki lately, there are many things brewing for the next year or so. I'm sorry that the 1.0 project is so complicated - the nature of the beast, I'm afraid. We could aim to document things more effectively, but then we probably wouldn't have enough time to work on the next release! But if you work with us, you'll soon pick up on the relevant parts of the work. What parts would interest you?

As regards the quality assessment, these can be found one at a time by looking at the WikiProject tags on the talk page of each article. These tags add the article talk page into a category such as "C-Class Japanese manga articles". If you want to look at a large number of data at once, you should go to this toolserver page, where you can list all of the articles from a given project, etc. It would be interesting to see how well you could predict the assessment using only technology. If it proves to be pretty accurate, there could be value in using it for low-importance articles, but I doubt if the community would want their expert review completely replaced by an automatic assessment! Here are a few points to note about the quality assessment system:

• • The value of it is that a subject-expert (e.g. in Japanese manga) is the one making the assessment. I (as a non-expert) could look over the article (just like a machine) and think that the article is really good, but an expert may see that much of the content is inaccurate or puffed up with personal opinion, etc. Likewise, I might see a short article with few pictures and think "this is poor", but an expert may recognise that the content is really well-written, accurate, and cover a lot of important facts in few words. Certain styles or types of content are appropriate in one subject, but not in another, and those familiar with the subject will understand that. (Try writing an article like persistent carbene without the use of technical language, for example!) Of course there is a down side to human assessments; a reviewer may have personal prejudices against certain styles or even certain topics.
  • Related to this is the ability to assess specific subject content within an article. An article may have really good coverage in one area, but poor in another. For example, an article on Leonardo da Vinci may cover his inventions well, but his painting rather poorly; in this case, it may be tagged as B-Class for WikiProject Engineering, but only Start-Class for WikiProject Painting (this is just a made-up example!)
  • One strength of the current system is that essentially all WikiProjects use the same assessment scale, allowing us to compare content from different subjects. However, there are variations in how the assessments are applied in practice; a few projects do not use C-Class, and a few projects may tag an article as B-Class that most would consider to be C or even Start.
  • A problem with the current system is that assessments are often out of date. Even though many WikiProjects have assessment drives to keep things up to date, they often get neglected. We have some chemistry articles that haven't been reassessed since 2006. Your automated assessment could be VERY valuable for solving this problem. Your program might check a list of 1000 articles with assessments over one year old, and then report back, "These 17 articles gave an auto-assessment that was very different from the manual assessment. You should check these again manually".

As for the miscounting of featured articles (FAs), I'm not sure of the reason. If you look at WP:FA, it lists around 3400 articles as featured, and that is the definitive list. The fact that we have over 3700 may indicate that we have some articles tagged as FA-Class which have lost their FA status.

Please let me know if I can help you further, and how you would like to help the 1.0 project. All the best, Walkerma (talk) 19:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank Walkerma very much for his suggestion. They are very important and helpful. For my question of finding the annotations of wiki pages, this toolserver page is the perfect solution. I plan to try some samples first. If there is any progress, I will post here. :) Arthur.xl.wang (talk) 00:52, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

One or more of the files that you uploaded or altered has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it/them not being deleted. Thank you.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of MGA73 (talk) at 18:27, 28 November 2011 (UTC).

Hey Walkerma, is there any chance you could add brief descriptions of what the different files on this page are, and how big they are? For example, what's the difference between the .zim file and the .zim.md5 file? Kaldari (talk) 09:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Not sure myself - it's a bit technical for me! I'm guessing that the md5 is a compressed version and the zim is the raw file. I'm really busy IRL at the moment, but will have much more time after tomorrow - I'll contact User:Kelson who is the person who created those files. Hopefully I can also get a bit more engaged in WP again soon! Walkerma (talk) 17:09, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Heptane CNMR.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MGA73 (talk) 19:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Heptane HNMR.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MGA73 (talk) 19:52, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

	New England Wikimedia General Meeting
	The New England Wikimedia General Meeting will be a large-scale meetup of all Wikimedians (and friends) from the New England area in order to discuss regional coordination and possible formalization of our community (i.e., a chapter). Come hang out with other Wikimedians, learn more about ongoing activities, and help plan for the future! Potential topics: What is a Wikimedia chapter and should we work towards one? Planning of regular Boston meetups (any other New England cities?) Planning for upcoming coordinated events (Wikipedia Love Libraries, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiknic, etc.) Outreach to universities (WikiProject Academical Village) and cultural institutions (GLAM) Wikimania DC is this summer. Your ideas!
	Sunday, April 22 1:30 PM – 4:30 PM	Conference Room C06, Johnson Building, Boston Public Library—Central Library 700 Boylston St., Boston MA 02116
Please sign up here: Wikipedia:Meetup/New England!

Message delivered by Dominic at 09:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.

hi I can probably help you BO; talk 22:01, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer! That's an area I know little about, so I'd appreciate your help. Walkerma (talk) 14:55, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

You looked at the quality of census before. I have improved it and agree that it should be more informative. Any chance you could advise generally now on further development? I know too much about the topic to be able to judge but the number of hits indicates a wide user interest. It would be good if it wasn't start class but general improvements to make it more informative is my principal concern. Feel free to direct me to someone else.Ca3tki (talk) 22:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a look tomorrow. I'm really busy tonight - up all night working IRL - but after that's over I'll take a look. Walkerma (talk) 22:36, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

thanks - had to look up IRL - any advice will be appreciatedCa3tki (talk) 12:20, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Martin, it was great seeing you at Wikimania 2012. I wanted to point you to the MediaWiki extension we talked about, which enables interactive 3D models of proteins and DNA on Wikipedia. It's available at http://pdbhandler.wmflabs.org. Some background information on the extension is available here. Any feedback would be appreciated.

We also talked about Wikipedia 1.0. The earliest I'd possibly be available to devote some time to helping with that is October. Another person that might be able to help is Oren Bochman, who presented a very interesting talk on Article Quality Assessment using Content Analytics at this year's Wikimania. Perhaps some elements of Oren's software could be incorporated into article ratings/assessments for Wikipedia 1.0? Best, Emw (talk) 00:49, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the links, and it was really good to meet you too. My work has been on this wiki, which has some interesting features such as structure search capabilities. If there are Jmol people in Philly next month, I'll get in touch and try to arrange a meeting for you if you're available. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 13:29, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Chemicals for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 05:46, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello, you are receiving this message because you are currently a participant of WikiProject Good articles. Since the creation of the WikiProject, over 200 user's have joined to help review good article nominations and contribute to other sections of the WikiProject. Over the years, several of these users have stopped reviewing articles and/or have become inactive with the project but are still listed as participates. In order to improve communications with other participants and get newsletters sent out faster (newsletters will begin to be sent out monthly starting in October) all participants that are no longer active with the WikiProject will be removed from the participants list.

If you are still interested in being a participant for this WikiProject, please sign your user name here and please help review some articles so we can reduce the size of the backlog. If you are no longer interested, you do not need to sign your name anywhere and your name will be removed from the participants list after the deadline. Remember that even if you are not interested at this time, you can always re-add your name to the list whenever you want. The deadline to sign your name on the page above will be November 1, 2012. Thank-you. 13:36, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for having to send out a second message but a user has brought to my attention that a point mentioned in the first message should be clarified. If user's don't sign on this page, they will be moved to an "Inactive Participants" list rather then be being removed from the entire WikiProject. Sorry for any confusion.--Dom497 (talk)15:26, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

→ Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 05:50, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

U.S. Ada Lovelace Day 2012 edit-a-thon, Harvard University - You are invited!

Now in its fourth year, Ada Lovelace Day is an international celebration of women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and related fields. Participants from around New England are invited to gather together at Harvard Law School to edit and create Wikipedia entries on women who have made significant contributions to the STEM fields. Register to attend or sign up to participate remotely - visit this page to do either. 00:49, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

You are reciving this message because you have not added your name to the list of active WikiProject Good Articles participants. Though you may have recived the first message sent out in September, some users may have had that message archived before coming online to read it and therefore never saw it. If you are deeming yourself inactive with the WikiProject please disregard this message as your name will be moved to an "inactive participant" list at the end of the clean-up. If you are still active with the WikiProject, please be sure to include your name on this list. The current deadline to add your name to the list (if you are still active) is November 1, 2012. A third and final message will be sent out during the last week of the clean-up before the deadline. Thank-you.--EdwardsBot

You are receiving this message because you have not added your name to the list of active WikiProject Good Articles participants. Though you may have recived the past two messages sent out in September and October, some users may have had that message archived before coming online to read it and therefore never saw it. If you are deeming yourself inactive with the WikiProject please disregard this message as your name will be moved to an "inactive participant" list at the end of the clean-up. If you are still active with the WikiProject, please be sure to include your name on this list. The deadline to add your name to the list (if you are still active) is November 1, 2012. This will be the last message sent out before the deadline which is in 2 days. Thank-you.--EdwardsBot