User talk:J. Noel Chiappa

J. Noel Chiappa

Current talk page

Archive 1, Archive 2

So, Noel, as long as you're checking out dawgs and stuff...

...could you have a read through of Miniature Fox Terrier? Thanks! Aleta Curry 03:07, 13 April 2008 (CDT)

checklist term; keep or reinvent?

OK, I'm in two minds about this. Since we are talking about a subset of the metadata functionality (the other being management of approval status) maybe we should keep this term? One change that would make sense would be to have the pagename and variant included in the checklist. The only reason they were kept separate is that they were not part of the original checklist. I added those two later and did not want to confuse people who were already familiar with the old checklist. I also want to have the pagename as a distinct entity since it was critical it got filled in. Now we have the automatic error checks and better instructions (not to mention preloaded text for a new metadata page) I think they can all be lumped together.

Back to the name. Possibly we could call it Checklist metadata vs Approval metadata rather than Metadata content? Chris Day 21:48, 17 April 2008 (CDT)

I'll check the forum re: by field. I agree lets mull over the metdata format and nomenclature. If we're going to make changes we might as well make a lot all at once. We can use out recent experience to tighten it up and possibly make it more user friendly. While you're at it, let's think about any major improvements we can make. Your perspective is very different to mine since you are seeing it with fresh eyes. Any other things you can think of while you are at it, besides the by field? Chris Day 22:04, 17 April 2008 (CDT)

your advice please...

I have some notes stored on Guantanamo medical care. You and I discussed it a bit within the last week or so. I have come across some new developments. And I would like your advice.

I am still trying to adapt to the different standards here. Articles here may require a higher level of scholarship. That is a good thing. But it may also require a greater level of interpretation. I am having a bit of trouble with this aspect. In my online comments prior to working on that other big wiki I didn't shy away from intellectually honest interpretation. But, on the other big wiki, I got out of the habit of doing so, trying to let the facts speak for themselves, to avoid challenges over POV.

Some of the feedback I am getting here seems to be telling me I should include a measure of interpretation, to provide context, and improve readability.

I think this recent article erodes the assertions that Guantanamo captives have received good health care.

• Joby Warrick. Detainees Allege Being Drugged, Questioned: U.S. Denies Using Injections for Coercion, Washington Post, Tuesday, April 22, 2008, p. A01. Retrieved on 2008-03-01. “Nusairi, now free in Saudi Arabia, was unable to learn what drugs were injected before his interrogations. He is not alone in wondering: At least two dozen other former and current detainees at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere say they were given drugs against their will or witnessed other inmates being drugged, based on interviews and court documents.”

So, do you think I have that right? Should I try to allow a limited measure of interpretation into an article about medical care at Guantanamo?

Thanks! George Swan 18:49, 22 April 2008 (CDT)

Strings

Stephen says:

"Email tools@citizendium.org Stephen Ewen 14:01, 4 May 2008 (CDT)"

FYI---David Yamakuchi 00:33, 5 May 2008 (CDT)

More on definitions

I thought about this, and I think someone else thought about it also, but what is your opinion on using Template:H:title? --Robert W King 13:47, 25 May 2008 (CDT)

I just had to tell you I laughed out loud

... at AstronomerAmateur. Although it's completely tongue-in-cheek, it frames the problems with Wikipedia with razor-sharp precision. I'm glad you jumped ship and came here! -Eric M Gearhart 17:47, 25 May 2008 (CDT)

Template documentation

Are you going to incorporate Robert Kings template into the preload of Doc? I have to admit I have not used his template for any of the documentation pages I have written. Mine usually evolve with time as I write notes to myself. Chris Day 11:08, 2 June 2008 (CDT)

TlDoc

Hopefully you have a short answer for this problem. note the tag at the bottom and the fact that the first title does not format correctly (the header you see in that example, that looks like an intro between = marks, i added as a way to force the TOC look correct). I assume I have to have each title in the /doc without the header markup (==Title== etc.), but can i still use a TOC after removing the headers? Chris Day 13:42, 3 June 2008 (CDT)

Needles in a haystack

After seeing this disaster it reminded me that having that template is a horrible but unavoidable idea. But at the time I did not really think about using the format Template:Metadata/Basename. Possibly there was a reason for not doing that, but it's not obvious to me right now. Should we consider such a move, I know, what a job, but if we don't do it now finding templates will be like looking for a needle in a haystack. With a Template:Metadata prefix at least the others will not be interspersed within the metadata ones. Any thoughts? I assume you have already experienced this problem when looking for templates to add to the template page. Chris Day 22:27, 3 June 2008 (CDT)

Any thoughts on this Noel? I think you may have overlooked it (possibly on purpose :P ) Chris Day 12:42, 6 June 2008 (CDT)

No, I hadn't forgotten it - just too busy recently to do anything with it! J. Noel Chiappa 14:01, 6 June 2008 (CDT)

Godel and stuff

Hiya Noel,

Is anyone going to tackle Godel's IT in the future ? I came across (what seems to me) a powerful pedagogy for rendering GIT. This was proposed by a 'crackpot' on WP who was shot down in a hail of flames (and banned, i think.) But I think it's legit, very powerful, and does occur (tho rather obscurely) in the literature.

The idea is to sketch a proof of GIT from the modern perspective of computation. This does great violence to the historical development of GIT, and it also takes for granted some ideas that originated with Godel ... but it is a powerful way to first see GIT from a modern perspective. Let me try to sketch : --- We proof Halting first. Start with a computer language, say Lisp.

• Quining : A computer program P exists which 'prints out its own source code' (or evaluates to a string which is its own source code.) This is a common brain-teaser among beginning programmers, and within the reach of many students to figure out.

• Introspection : From above, a program can access its own source code and place it in a variable. For example, if we have a program CountCharacters(P) which reads a program P and outputs the number of characters in its source code, we can always trivially modify CountCharacters to make CountMyCharacters() which processes its own source code. In other words, a program can always say "myself".

• Halting : Suppose a Halting-Detector exists, H(P). Use the Introspection property to turn H against itself :

Create Spite such that : If H(Spite) = "halt", hang in a loop. Else, terminate.

We have a contradiction, thus H cannot exist.

Finally we go from Halting to GIT : Statements about computation map to theorems in number theory, etc.

The formalist justifiably screams bloody murder; but the ability to convince the reader of an otherwise obscure and baroque subject is, perhaps, compelling. Christopher J. Reiss 12:56, 4 June 2008 (CDT)

why not subpage

Just out of curiosity is there any reason why the disambiguation page is not a subpage of the basename? If it were we would have the advantage of just adding the subpages template at the top like every other page (KISS principle). Likewise, we can then use the BASEPAGENAME magic words to identify the disambiguated term, for example, {{dabhdr|Poseidon}} would not be required, the subpages template would place the {{dabhdr}} template and use the magic word to specify the header. Chris Day 12:15, 5 June 2008 (CDT)

Sounds fine to me too, and more elegant. -- Daniel Mietchen 02:42, 6 June 2008 (CDT)

Now I'm wondering if the Template:Dambigbox is even required? I can see how such a template would be useful in wikipedia where they have the dominant usage as an article, but wouldn't your proposal for having all disambiguated terms redirect to the disambiguation page mean this is not required? Chris Day 10:23, 6 June 2008 (CDT)

I've lost track of this idea. Where are we at? Looking at the disambiguation pages there seem to be many different formats. I think I am still leaning to the subpage with only the subpages template. Just so much simpler and intuitive with the rest of clusters. Chris Day 10:30, 17 June 2008 (CDT)

Disambiguation of "Anaximander"

I just started a page on Anaximander, the ancient Greek philosopher. Then I discover that it needs to be disambiguated. With what, I don't know except maybe a Lunar crater. Anyway, the article title shows up in a funny tan/gold color in the Related Articles page of Pythagoras.

How do I find out about these disambiguations before I create the article? Should I first define the word, then, when creating the page, click to it from some Related Article page? And if I find out it needs disambiguation, what then? Also, without knowing what it needs to be disambiguated from, is it always the case that the primary name should go to a disambig page?

James F. Perry 18:22, 5 June 2008 (CDT)

Applying templates on special pages

Hi Noel, looking at Special:Wantedpages, I was wondering whether templates like {{r}} could be applied there somehow, too - this would probably lower the hesitation threshold for starting such a wanted article. Besides, I have always wished to put such special pages on my watchlist - is there a way to achieve that? Thanks. -- Daniel Mietchen 03:53, 6 June 2008 (CDT)

Dealing with duplicates

Noel, I noticed that you've been clearing up a lot of dupicate-article situations recently. What is the protocol (and the technical how-to) for doing this? For example, there's been an article titled "Copyrighting" for some time, and today there's a new article titled "Copyright" (which seems to me to be the better title). Each article, so far, has only one author, as far as I can tell. Should the person noticing this situation just point it out to the two authors and let them discuss it, or will the Law Workgroup deal with it, or what? Thanks. Bruce M.Tindall 10:19, 6 June 2008 (CDT)

Bible books

Fine with me (to call them "Genesis (Bible book)" by way of disambiguation). But I just did a minor edit; it's Tom Morris who created the Genesis article (and therefore presumably will be creating more of 'em). I'll pass the suggestion on to him. Also -- I am ignorant of the mechanics of deleting or renaming articles. Could you please point me to a primer on that? Bruce M.Tindall 11:20, 6 June 2008 (CDT)

disambigbox

I found a solution but don't ask me to explain it. The problem is that the magic word does not kick in with the following format: {{disambigbox||Foo}}. I then tried the magic word for the second term ({{{2|{{PAGENAME}}}}}) and I see the same problem with respect to {{disambigbox|Foo, Bar|}}. But in the form of {{disambigbox|Foo, Bar}} the second term does become the {{PAGENAME}}. Consequently, i think your best bet is to switch the order of the first and second parameters in the template. Thus, {{disambiguation|Foo|Foo, Bar}} and {{disambiguation|Foo}} will work the way you want. Is this not better anyway, rather than having {{disambiguation||Foo}}? Chris Day 12:34, 6 June 2008 (CDT)

Taxobox

I'm having issues with taxobox (well one issue: as written, it only allows for one subdivision, and often there are multiple subdivisions)... do you where I should go to fix it/ suggest getting it fixed? I know nothing about the meta-wiki world. Thanks! Marielle Fields Newsome 18:36, 6 June 2008 (CDT)

Thanks! Yeah, it was one of those copy-code-and-rename-variables deals, pretty simple. Despite my issues with }}. Marielle Fields Newsome 22:35, 6 June 2008 (CDT)

Nominating United States Environmental Protection Agency for approval

Noel, I would like to get the subject article nominated for approval. Since Richard Jensen and I are the only two who worked on it, it is my understanding that we cannot nominate it.

Would you read it and see if you might nominate it for approval? If so, do you know of anyone else who could also nominate it? I think that the only other active editor with an interest in environmental articles is Anthony Argyriou, and I just don't know him well enough ... do you know him?

Thanks in advance. - Milton Beychok 05:01, 7 June 2008 (CDT)

I may be able to help. See my comments on article talk page -- it may simply be that we should plan on additional sub-articles. Howard C. Berkowitz 07:48, 7 June 2008 (CDT)

Yes, we would like to rename United States Environmental Protection Agency

Noel, you left a message on the Talk page of the the subject article asking if we wanted to rename the article. Richard Jensen and I have agreed that it should be renamed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Would you be so kind as to move the article and the entire cluster (subpages, Metadate page and Approval page) to that new name? Thanks in advance. - Milton Beychok 22:11, 8 June 2008 (CDT)

Properties Storage

Hi Noel,

The properties in the scheme I'm proposing _would_ all be on one page (or at least would appear to the reader to be so)...why not let's call it the Properties page here just so we have a name to "speak" of. The properties page would of course in reality include data that are stored in various other sub-sub-pages as reported by the list page...like the model at Unobtanium/Properties

The advantage of this over just putting all the data directly on the properties page itself is seen when you only need one property's info or a very small subset of the total data.

I'd started (as Chris reminded me yesterday) trying to make a periodic table that would let us resize and change the type of info displayed.

see User:David Yamakuchi/Sandbox2

It seemed that when we want to talk about periodic tables, there are many and diverse views on which data are important to include, and I'm definitely of the opinion that there is likely a more accessable way than what we currently have at Periodic Table of Elements. So I branched off of the stuff we did on the elements infobox and made a template for a periodic table that could be resized and started to futz around with populating the table with data.

As Chris pointed out, a simple approach would be to just hand cobble the data into the table, but it occurred to me that if I was going to be entering the Atomic Mass for say Lithium, I probably ought to put it somewhere under the Lithium page first as that would be where folks would look for it. But then what we would have is NOT one location for the info...it's in the article (or at least on the properties subpage), and then again it would be in the table. I suspect that this kind of thing happens quite a lot already, and I'm afraid it will cause consistency problems for CZ.

Specifically, when the data someday becomes obsolete for whatever reason, there needs to be more than one edit to fix it...but the real question is how is an author to know that? The Lithium article would likely be the place the author updates and then we would have an article about the element that is "out of sync" with the periodic table.

This is the reason that the property data ought to be retrieved from the material's article's (subpage) on the fly anytime we use the data outside of the material's article. The only practical way that I've found so far to do this is with the seperate subpage approach.

That said, there are still a lot of things about wikis I just don't know, so perhaps I'm simply ignorant of a better solution. I'm now of course curious to know a little more about this "selector" you mentioned in your comment...is it different from the #switch/case approach?--David Yamakuchi 03:25, 9 June 2008 (CDT)

Couldn't move pages

Hi Noel, I've run into a slight problem I wasn't able to fix myself. The content of the pages NGC 6694 and NGC 6994 should be reversed. NGC 6994 is actually Messier 73 while NGC 6694 is Messier 26. I stumbled across the M73 error while editting Aquarius and couldn't do a move page because M73 was occupying 6694 which is when I noticed the double error. If you could look into this one I'd appreciate it (or point me in the right direction of course). Thanks, --Michael Geldorp 09:43, 12 June 2008 (CDT)

Approval nomination for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Noel, Howard Berkowitz has agreed to nominate the article. However, he is not sure as to how to do so. I told him to read CZ:Approval process. Would you be so kind as to contact him and help to make the Approval nomination? Thanks in advance, Milton Beychok 10:34, 13 June 2008 (CDT)

Prefixindex and the like

Hi, and thanks for the Prefixindex search link, it is really helpful. BTW, is there such a thing as a "Suffixindex" search, where I could see (for instance) all the pages whose names end in /Fooness ?...maybe a wildcard character?...*/Fooness does not seem to work.--David Yamakuchi 15:50, 15 June 2008 (CDT)

Speedy Speedup

Done.. If you have trouble getting a response, leave a message on my talk and it will email me, too. --D. Matt Innis 07:56, 16 June 2008 (CDT)

Thanks Noel (and Matt!) for fixing the ngc numbers mix-up. --Michael Geldorp 09:14, 16 June 2008 (CDT)

Still alive

Update on user page. I'm currently being distracted by other things so I haven't updated much. Thank you very much for inquiring though! --Robert W King 08:45, 22 June 2008 (CDT)

Noel, please help me

Noel:

Sometime ago, I used the {{Archive box|auto=long}} template tag to archive the earliest part of my Talk page.

Today, I created User talk:Milton Beychok \ Archive 2 and also included the {{Archive box|auto=long}}template tag on that page. But I cannot get it to show up in the Archive box on my Talk page. That Archive box just shows Archive 1.

How do I get the Archive box to list the Archive 2 that I created today? Are there some other parameters needed in the {{Archive box|auto=long}} template box when adding another archive?

I have tried everything I could think of with no luck. Please help me get it done. Milton Beychok 21:18, 1 July 2008 (CDT)

Never mind. I finally figured it out myself. Thanks anyway. Milton Beychok 22:06, 1 July 2008 (CDT)

wimbledon

hi, noel, have sliced off part of my ring finger & the ER ppl hve put it together but it's hard to type. i saw a little of the third set at 5-5, just before the rain, then turned it back on at 7-7 in th fifth. i was too nervous to watch. if i'd *known* nadal was gonna win, though, i woulda watched the whole match.... cheers! Hayford Peirce 15:37, 12 July 2008 (CDT)

added proof sketch to Halting Problem

Hi Noel!

I added a (rather unconventional) proof sketch for Halting, curious what you think about it Christopher J. Reiss 02:00, 14 July 2008 (CDT)

Could you do this?

Noel:

When one goes to his/her "View and edit watchlist" at here, there is a list of all the articles being watched. That list is not alphabetized on Citizendium. It is alphabetized on Wikipedia, which means that it can be done.

When one has 70 or more articles being watched (as I do), it is extremely helpful to have the "View and edit watchlist" page alphabetized. Is this something you could do? If not, who can you refer me to someone that can do it? I have already asked Robert King, with no reply as yet. Thanks in advance, Milton Beychok 17:18, 16 July 2008 (CDT)

Hi, Noel. Have you decided whether or not this is something you could do? Please let me know. Thanks, Milton Beychok 21:50, 26 July 2008 (CDT)

Noel, never mind. Greg Sabino fixed it. - Milton Beychok 12:13, 31 July 2008 (CDT)

R60-2 is incorrect

R60-2 is not correct terminology. BMW's official designation is R60/2 or "R 60/2." Please reverse your change. Jeff Dean 09:13, 1 August 2008 (CDT)

Moving (renaming) an article

Noel, when an article is moved, the Talk page goes with it. Should the other subpages (Definition, Bibliography, External Links, Related Links, Metadata) be moved first? Or should the main article be moved first? Or what? - Milton Beychok 11:25, 1 August 2008 (CDT)

Milton, move the Metadata page first. Then the article, then the others, if necessary. D. Matt Innis 15:08, 1 August 2008 (CDT)

Resurrecting "Separating page-names..."

Hey Noel--

Some of the stuff Howard is working on has some really thorny Naming Conventions-type issues-- and this in addition to the Osama bin Laden debate (and all and sundry Romanized title issues), and the debate over Anthony's Naming Convention proposal, etc., etc... All this is to say that I strongly feel that we should work towards implementing your idea for separating page-names and article titles. I was tempted to start it as a new proposal (though I'm probably too bogged down with grad school to be the driver) but I wanted to check with you and make sure that there wasn't some compelling reason you hadn't done so already.

Thanks, Brian P. Long 10:30, 5 August 2008 (CDT)

TFTP

FYI, I started a TFTP article, which is pretty stubby at the moment. Do you want to have any involvement with this, anywhere from contributor to editor to Great Server God? :-)

Howard C. Berkowitz 13:01, 23 August 2008 (CDT)

New draft of Gender article

Hi, Noel -- I don't know if you saw this -- maybe not -- on the Gender talk page, but I've started a whole new article on gender at User:Timothy Perper/Sandbox. Please come over and look at it if you're interested. It's of course not done yet, but it will get there. Thanks. Timothy Perper 18:31, 27 September 2008 (CDT)