User talk:Marshman

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to Wikibooks! Now that your user page is here, you are one of us who suffer dual addiction, both Wikiholic and Wikiworm :). I wish you well in linking Botany to the 'Pedia. Again, Welcome aboard! ..LouI 19:13, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Thanks! I was contemplating how one could develop study outlines for topics at Wikipedia, and discovered WikiBooks. The idea is more suited to this project. - Marshman 20:47, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)

A suggestion: You don't need to copy an entire article from the 'pedia to protect your references from future editing. You can simply refer to a specific historic version. Thus Plant cell gets the current page, while Planr cell oldid=1407735 always returns a specific historic version.

There is probably a shorter way (without full URL) to get to the Wikipedia namespace, and I'll ask in the staff lounge. LouI 05:01, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Actually, I was not concerned about protecting any particular version on Wikipedia from being edited. I am attempting/intending to improve the Wikipedia entries if I find the deficient, otherwise I welcome each articles improvement with time. I do intend to bring over material when it is introductory in nature and therefore useful to simply have the text in Wikibook Guide to set the stage for suggested readings of articles. I will either write that material myself, or grab a good start from off of Wikipedia.
Seems like I was told there would eventually be a shorter way to get to Wikipedia namespaces, and I have seen "en:" used, but was unsure if that was available yet. - Marshman 08:06, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I want to nominate you to be an admin but can't find the nomination page. --Karl Wick

I don't know where it is! Thanks for support. I did get admin at Wikipedia and have not done too much damage over there. 8} - Marsh 17:22, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I see it happened, presumably less formal here than at Wikipedia as probably required by the present small crowd at Wikibooks. Anyway, thanks, whomever is/was responsible. Sysop Marsh

Hi Marsh. Thanks for your comments on my talk page. I realize that your intention for the introduction was to just point out the similarities between English and German words. However, I've heard that it's best to also write down the proper article right from the beginning where you introduce a new word. Thomas

Hi Marshman, you've put the comment to Robbyjo on his user page, not his talk page. I'd move it myself but that wouldn't look right :) Dysprosia 09:13, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Thanks it was late at night. He had a blank user page, so I clicked on "Discuss this Page", but did not watch what came up! - Marsh

Contents

[edit] Moving Botany pages

Marsh, this new naming scheme looks like a bad idea to me. "Biology Botany"? That does not seem any better than Botany. Worse, rather. Did they do it to you or did you consent ? Its a trifling thing but bugs me, I'd like to see if we could undo it. Comments ? --Karl Wick

From what I can gether, Botany was selected as an example page. I was not asked. Although Biology_Botany is not too thrilling to me, the rest of the system, say Botany_Introduction_How_to_use seems like a logical approach. Of course it can all be undone, with a little work. I agree, a discussion should be set up separate from the Staff Lounge, especially if changes are going forward. - Marsh 04:03, 27 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Marsh-dogg, who did this act ? I would like to communicate with them. --Karl Wick
Marshman! Why not set up a discussion page for the subject. I responded to the initial change, but I was not logged in (found out later) so it is bnot recorded in my contributions list. But should be on the page history? - Marsh 07:41, 27 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Why not Biology:Botany, like I've done with Discrete mathematics:whatever ? Dysprosia
Actually, I'm not proposing any system; See Wikibooks:Staff_lounge for what discussion has taken place to date (not much) - Marsh 08:31, 27 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Sorry about before - I missed the SL discussion to the matter. Dysprosia 05:29, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Which has not gone very far by the way — but it is generally pretty quiet over here compared with Wikipedia. No problem, I;m cool 8^) but I was in the process of changing the traditional "tight" form of page names to one more open when you came along almost (a day or two) after me and "reverted". Since these are "books," I'm thinking the look of every line has a bit more impact than is the case for an encyclopedia article, so I've opted for now to go with the open look (hope you do not mind) - Marsh 05:51, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi Marsh, I've listened to the alphabet recording and I don't think the 'B' and 'E' sound English. However, recording with my $10 microphone, the initial sounds of 'B' and 'P' (which are the same as in English I think) do not come out as clearly as they could be. If I get the chance, I'll make a better recording some time later. Thomas

I listened again and the Bay is ok, just a tad towards Bee. The Ay seems more towards an EE (english), but both shifts could be the microphone. It is great you can produce these, so I'm not complaining. Great additions to the text! - Marsh 17:58, 29 Oct 2003 (UTC)

About the main page width. I think it must be a browser issue. What browser are you using ? Theresa knott 22:04, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi Marsh, the layout for vocabulary can be done by leaving the first character of a line blank, for example:

das Wort        word
der Buchstabe   character

Thomas

Shoot. I did read that when I first showed up at Wikipedia. Thanks - Marsh 06:04, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Link format

Marshman, following is a short, tidy format for writing working links into the main Wikipedia: wiki. (That is, if you did not know this already). And I am talking about the format the link is written in, not where this particular link leads .. hope I am not confusing the issue. --Karl Wick

Thanks. I see what you are saying. I'll try that format. I originally used En:Wikipedia|wiki and that worked, but then one day stopped working. I'm told Wikipedia:en:wiki|wiki is the correct form.

[edit] Pictures

Marshman -- do you take your own pictures ? Where do you get them ? They are beautiful and bring a real level of professional image to the site. --Karl Wick

Thanks for the compliment. Yes, I take them myself. I bought a Nikon Coolpix 950 a few years ago, and have been using it to illustrate reports, websites, etc. Nice thing about digital, you can just click away without regard to film costs. I've taken over 7000 pictures in those few years, but have kept only perhaps 1000 or a little less. It has been a very good camera, but I will probably need a new one pretty soon. - Marsh 02:29, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Wow I am impressed. I'd buy the old camera off of you if you are going to sell it... --Karl Wick
I will let you know ! - 24.94.82.245 01:20, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC) - Marsh 01:21, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Marshman,
Hello, I hope that you have been well lately.
I was just looking at some beautiful botanical photos and remembering your Nikon Coolpix 950. Do you still have it? Still want to sell it? If so, I’ll make you an offer.--Karl Wick 19:51, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hey Karl. You're back! That camera is starting to get difficult to use. I'm debating whether to get a new one or get it fixed. You are right, it is a great camera and that model is no longer available (Nikon Coolpix 950). I think we can both do much better in terms of functionality, but I've not had time to research that. Let me see if I can replace the camera for myself and get that one fixed for a reasonable price. Then we can talk. As is, I could not put much value on it to sell although it does still work and I continue to turn out good photos, but I'm having a battery problem (may not have anything to do with the camera) that I need to solve. - marsh 04:21, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Marshman: do you have an image or images that we could use on the main page of the general biology textbook? --Karl Wick

Have lots of images. Do you have anything special in muind? - Marsh 18:27, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I didn't think about a picture till just after I put the recipe up. I didn't cook at home last night, was cooking for my grandmother and just used what I had on hand, and it turned out really good. Next time, I'll bring a camera with me. :~) Gentgeen 06:08, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Photographing food is a real art; but would certainly enhance any recipe to have a photo of the finished product - Marsh 16:57, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Dear Marshman,

I only learned about the wiki concept recently, and (like everybody around it seems) I think it is great. I have started to contribute to the Botany textbook, mainly on chapter 6, and created missing chapters and updated the content page and TOC. I have done a PhD in molecular plant virology, therefore my interest in chap 6. After general introductions, I focus the text there mostly on plant pathogens, since they are of most interest for those studying botany (and hopelessly ignored in the wikipedia virology and bacteria articles) Please have a look at the book when you have time, and give me feedback on my work. Thank you, and best wishes, Aletta 21:15, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Wiki concept is great if you like to write or edit. You are certainly welcome to help out here with the Botany text project (add some info to the contributors page when you get a chance) and I like seeing you have a strong background in microbes!. The concept of this textbook is one of providing some general introductory text for each chapter, then links that are essentially reading assignments to appropriate articles at Wikipedia. I usually spend most of my time working on those Wikipedia articles to insure that they are useful to the textbook as well as to the wikipedia. However, there is no hard and fast rule about how much information should and should not go into the textbook. Eventually, we may want to include most of the information at Wikipedia over here as well, although I do not forsee that happening soon. That is to say, I would not import wikipedia articles into the textbook to make this book "more complete". But put as much original writing into each chapter of the textbook as you want, then adjust the reading assignments accordingly. - Marsh 02:05, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Help reviewing books

Hi Marshman. I saw you downgraded some of the development stages Development stage: 100% (as of Jan 12, 2005) I gave to the chapters of your book. That is quite some brave thing to do, and just in the spirit of a critical review! Of course, as the author you know your work best. Would you help me to review one or another book of your choice in a similar way on the Science bookshelf? You can use the template as explained in Development stages. There is no hurry, do it when you want to browse some other book. Thanks! --Andreas Ipp 21:51, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Can do. I'll go look at some of the other "biological sciences" texts. I got the impression you were either being very generous, or just putting in the "symbols" so that the authors could modify them to what looks more likely a status of each chapter. I do agree that "100%" is not necessarily the same as "done, no more additions anticipated" but really means the user can expect to get something close to full value out of that chapter, even if the author plans to tweek it a lot more. - marsh 04:07, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)



German:_Lesson_6:I'm from Germany and I don't understand "Mutti sagt Hallo." Say me, please - what do you want to say with "Mutti sagt Hallo." ?

Danke for getting back to me. The brother is trying to say "Mother says (to say) hello". That is, he is visiting from home, and brings greetings from their mom. Can you help clarify or improve that? - marsh

[edit] Basic Ecology Contents

Why did you revert my edits without any justification? You are deliberately violating naming policy. Such use of revert function makes me wonder if you really should be a sysop. Taking a look at operation log gives me no clue why you became one. --Derbeth talk 11:29, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Man, where did they find you? I've been here working on Wikibooks for a long long time and I know the rules about policy, the first being that "policy" as you now call your banners is suggestion and therefore cannot be violated. I do not appreciate stupid banners (essentialy a form of vandalism) being placed on the books I am working on and find your attitude more than bit aggressive, violating the cardinal rule at Wikipedia of making personal attacks on other editors. I did expain the revert on the page. - marsh 18:38, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Call it a personal attack but it occured that you don't use your sysop right for things other than your books cleanup. I can't see if you revert vandals or not, but your part of log shows no vadalised pages you deleted. In fact, you are not doing any administrative tasks. And calling cleanup templates "vandalism" is nothing more than arrogance from you. --Derbeth talk 22:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I deleted your vandalising of the pages I watch. And they are vandalism because of where you place them (more so because it appears there really is no such naming policy in place). Sorry I do not fit your definition of what I should be doing here, but then I may have missed the vote where you were elected king. I am a contributor to textbooks, and I will not be subjected to attacks by you. I have plenty of other things to do with my time. Please do not write on my user page again. - marsh 00:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Releasing a first PDF edition of Botany?

I have recently proposed that some Wikibooks are ready for a first PDF edition. Botany is a likely candidate. The first edition would contain a prominent link saying "If you wish to edit, correct or contribute to this book please click here". The idea is to use some of the better and more complete books as an example. What do you think? See:

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Staff_lounge#The_management_of_book_publishing_-_a_policy_suggestion

RobinH 16:25, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Happy to consider it, although not sure the Botany t5ext is really far enough along - marsh 18:38, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] German: Level 3

This needs a total remake, it is not even funny. It is very silly and useless to have a whole different sub-section, with all the lessons of level 2, and the only thing which is different is a small, little advance page for each lesson. It needs different, and harder lessons. Isn't that the whole reason for a different sub-section page? We need all the complex grammer and difficult words of German in this level, or put the easier parts of complex German grammer and vocabulary of it here, and make a Level 4 and put the more difficult parts of complex German grammer and vocabulary in there. Derbeth even said we had to do something. And it is time. We need to get a plan together. -- German Men92talk 1:03, 17 Feb 2006 (UTC)

I'm not real clear on your complaint, but I think you do not like the idea of having a Level 3 in the German textbook. It was an idea for having a more advanced course that built easily on the Level 2—that was the plan. Of course, we could as well just mush together each "advanced" page with the corresponding Level 2 page and by that process create a new or separate Level 3 textbook. And of course, when you say "what it needs" you must back up a minute and realize that while some lessons are more or less complete, most others are just a shell of what could be done. So the obvious response to seeing a deficient subsection page (or any page) is to add to it, not complain about it. And I will not address what I think about your statement "Derbeth even said we had to do something"; is Derbeth a contributor to this textbook? - marsh 19:01, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

No, but he is an admin here, and that is really why I pushed forward with seperate lessons, because he asked me or a main contributorto fix it. -- German Men92talk 21:22, 1 Mar 2006 (UTC)

No problem, really. I just have serious reservations about Derbeth. But YOUR ideas are what is important here, so I won't be side-tracked. I'll check in and see how you develop the (is it now five levels?) lessons the way you are going. - marsh 06:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to remove your sysop rights

Marshman

I'm dropping you this note as I note another user has made a request on WB:RFA for your account to lose sysop rights. If you would like to comment on the matter, please do so there. Kind regards, Jguk 17:49, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Actually, a vote is under way to remove the sysop rights from 10 admins. I think Jguk left you a note because you are the only active editor subject to such a vote, and perhaps because he voted to oppose removing your sysop rights. I have been leaving notes with all 10 admins concerning the vote. Even though Jguk has already informed you of the vote, it seemed strange for me to leave you out. Here is the note I have been leaving:
A vote is being held to remove your sysop privileges. The basis for this vote is lack of use of these privileges. You may want to participate at Wikibooks:Requests_for_adminship#Marshman_.28_talk_.7C_email_.7C_contribs_.29. See also the discussion at Wikibooks:Staff_lounge#Removing_Sysop_Status. --JMRyan 23:04, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for at least showing that much respect - marsh

Marshman, I am definitely against your sys-op rights being taken away. Where is the appropriate place to make that known publicly? Thank you, --Karl Wick 20:27, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Fernsehturm Stuttgart.jpg

I have been using a script User:Kernigh/monobook.js (copied from Commons:MediaWiki:Extra-tabs.js) to examine image uploads. Thus I noticed that you have many untagged images. Most of them indicate the author credit and copyright license very clearly, and at some point someone will tag them {{GFDL}}.

However, Image:Fernsehturm Stuttgart.jpg (which you uploaded two years ago at 9 March 2004) claims to be from the "German Wikipedia" but gives no license information. I checked the same filename in de.wikipedia and commons.wikimedia and found nothing. Do you know the license information? If so you could add a copyright tag. Otherwise it might be better to delete the image; it is on the German Grammar page and we could probably replace it with something else. --Kernigh 06:40, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Policy review

Policy is not the most exciting subject at Wikibooks but we do have some major unresolved issues.

The most important issue, in my opinion, is Dispute resolution which starts by declaring that:

"Currently there is no official organized process to resolve disputes between users"

The suggested remedy for this is: Wikibooks:Ad hoc administration committee which puts into place the absolute minimum in terms of an enforcement apparatus.

The second most important is Wikibooks:No personal attacks where a vote has recommended the policy be enforced but it still languishes as "proposed".

The third policy that is needed and which will prevent edit disputes from getting out of hand is Wikibooks:Editing disputes policy.

Other policies that need consideration are at: Policies and guidelines.

Please spare a minute or two to peruse these issues and add a comment and/or a vote. RobinH 12:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Classis

  • Is {{Classis}} a holding spot/building block for another template? I was going to nominate it for deletion, but I wanted to check with you first as the creator. — MrDolomite | Talk 01:02, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your De-Adminship

Hello. I would like to inform you that you will have your sysop rights removed here on 20 Apr 2007 due to inactivity. If you would like to discuss the matter, please see WB:RFA. You can re-apply for adminship at a later date if you wish. Thanks. -withinfocus 13:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I would like to add here that I am not completely convinced that there is a need to deadmin inactive users. Some very convincing arguments have been made in the past to keep admins around, and very weak reasons (admittedly I made the first suggestions) to remove admin status. Others like Karl Wick (mentioned above) certainly have your support.

Regardless, don't take this as an insult in any way, as you are certainly welcome to come back and continue editing Wikibooks at any time. And if you ever want to have the admin tools back (I'm fatalistic as I think the current mood with several active Wikibookians is to strip your admin rights), count on me to be one of your hardcore supporters. You have done nothing wrong except to deal with life and not let this project become an obsession. That, IMHO, is an admirable trait. --Rob Horning 13:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User_talk:Marshman"