User talk:Pigsonthewing/Archive 19

Talk to me, Andy Mabbett

• If you post a message on this page, I'll reply on this page to avoid fragmenting the discussion.
• If I've left you a message on your talk page, I will be watching it, so please reply there rather than here.
• If appropriate, I will move discussion from here to the relevant article's talk page, so that anyone interested can join in.
• If you want to start a new discussion thread, please start it at the bottom of the page. Better still, use the "+" tab next to the "edit this page" tab, or the link at the foot of this section, either of which will do that automatically.
• Please do not make links from within section headings.
• Inaccessible HTML (coloured text, "small" tags", etc.) will be removed from this page on sight.
• Please sign and date your entries by inserting four tildes (~~~~) at the end.
• Start a new discussion.

coor vs coord

Didn't know that, thankyou for updating me. Regards, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 11:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Template:Geobox/type/nature

I'm looking for someone to help with {{Geobox/type/nature}}, as User:Caroig appears to have left the project. The problem is that the template has provisions for "Landmarks" and Rivers, but none for Mountains and Lakes. In the Adirondack Park article, I am presently using Landmarks for both mountains and lakes, but it would clearly be preferable to have separate entries for them. Is this something you can help with? If not, do you know where best to take this request? TIA, -- Mwanner | Talk 14:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Try this. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. I'm puzzled, though-- it looks like mountains and lakes are being made a sub-case of Landmarks, rather than a separate class like Rivers. Granted, the code leaves me crosseyed, so I could be missing something. Thanks again, -- Mwanner | Talk 15:09, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

No, my proposal puts them on the same level as landmarks, rivers and buildings. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Great. Thanks again. -- Mwanner | Talk 15:28, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Co-ordinates

Aaah, that's how you do it. I couldn't find how to put co-ordinates near the title. Now I do, thanks to your edit to Birmingham Northfield. Cheers for that :) doktorb _words^deeds 19:09, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. There's documentation at {{coord}}. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:32, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

for helping clear out the backlog at the TfD holding cell. Much appreciated, especially since I've done a couple of those infobox conversion ones and therefore know what a giant pain they are to do! delldot ∇. 21:02, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Your comment on the AfD

is better suited to the article's talk page, where it also is. I would appreciate it if you removed it from the AfD, since it is of little relevance there and is only likely to confuse things. Serendi^podous 10:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

So long as the use of colour is being used to justify one side of the AfD debate; my comment is relevant there. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

The AfD article also uses colour-coding, albeit for different reasons. What's true of one is true of the other. Ergo your comment is meaningless as regards deciding whether one has an advantage. Serendi^podous 13:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

"Linear" coorodinates for Monarch's Way

Hi, I've seen your attempts to develop a method(s) for linear coordinates - but I don't really understand how or what is best... A "coord missing|United Kingdom" tag was recently added by a bot to Monarch's Way & I think the linear coords is probably what is needed - but the path is twisted & loops round on itself - so I think it would be a real challenge. If you had any ideas of the best way to tackle this that would be great (NB more details of points on the route are on the talk page where we are currently trying to expand the article).— Rod ^talk 11:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

That's an interesting, and somewhat extreme case. I would start to build a table of features, stating with the two end points, and adding main crossings or diversions and see how that grows. It might be best to do that on a sandbox page. It is almost certainly not possible to identify a single representative point, so feel free to remove the recently added template. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 12:18, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Biographical metadata

Are you interested in the debates on biographical metadata? I thought you might be interested in Wikipedia:Biographical metadata (would you be able to summarise what the microformats do for biographical stuff?) and also in the question I posed about gender metadata here. I was surprised to see that Wikipedia:Persondata doesn't include gender. Do the microformats include it? I also came across Freebase (eg. here) and the tables of information presented there look quite well done. Do you recognise the fields they are using there? Carcharoth (talk) 02:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

A good piece of work; thank you. I have added some stuff about microformats, and will reply to your other points on the talk page there, in order that the conversation is not fragmented. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 09:59, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I've also expanded Wikipedia:Metadata - I'm sure there are loads of other "metadata" projects, though I take rather a loose definition of metadata, sometimes including what would be more properly termed data. I tend to think of metadata as any information that can be usefully extracted and manipulated by external processes. That might end up covering rather a lot. If you have any thoughts on the best way for the Wikipedia:Metadata page to develop, that would be good. I note there isn't a talk page over there yet... Carcharoth (talk) 13:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

? The link to Wikipedia:Age calculation templates was meant to cover that. Also, {{BirthDeathAge}} seems to be the template that covers the functionality of the others, though how tidily that has been set up, and whether merging is possible, or how widespread the use is, I don't know. Carcharoth (talk) 15:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I was commenting on the latter's talk page, about its deficiencies, as you wrote that! Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)