User talk:FlagSteward

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Archives


Contents


[edit] WP:WINE newsletter

The Wine Project Newsletter!
Issue XI - February 21st, 2008

In this edition:

  • News & Notes - Every American Viticultural Area now has an article! Keeping up with the B class wine articles and find out which start class article of top importance was viewed almost 43,000 times between Dec-Jan.
Plus, find out which wine related Did you knows helped to dispel the myths around the Shiraz grape's origins and which Bordeaux wine chateau was a last minute addition to the Bordeaux Wine Official Classification of 1855-not without some controversy.
Also, what wine articles have the most potential to reach Good article status?
  • Wiki-Winos - Meet User:EvanProdromou! Evan who? Well let just say that another "wiki-wino" has come out the closet to say Hi and share what his project Vinismo can do to help Wikipedia's wine articles.
  • Wiki wine articles on the Web - Guess which prominent wine personality thinks that Wikipedia is one of the best wine resources on the web? Also find out who thinks our Mission grape article is lacking and how our Plavac Mali article cleared up some confusion about the grape's relationship to Zinfandel. Plus, was Mick Jagger really singing about Sommeliers in the Stones' song Beast of Burden?
This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list.
If you have any Wikipedia wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine/Newsletter.

[edit] WikiProject templates

Hi! I was going through the list of changes to WP:PLANTS assessments and noticed a couple of your edits that added or removed the WikiProject Plants template on the talk page. One of the changes I saw added a template to a page not within our scope diff (WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening would be best for the botanical gardens) and another removed the template from a page definitely within our scope diff. If you're confused about which articles we include in our project, I'd be happy to answer further questions you have. Thanks! Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 13:04, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

So you know, my reasoning was that Pepperoncini does not appear to refer to a specific cultivar, it seems to be a US-English term for a range of sweet peppers, prepared by pickling. Since it's more about the processing than a specific botanical entity, it seemed one for the Food project rather than Plants, just like tinned tomatoes or whatever. On the botanic gardens front, I must have been misled by the bit on WP:PLANTS where it says "This project's scope also includes botanists and botany-related articles". If a botanic garden isn't a botany-related subject, what is? Sure it could also go under the horticulture project, but it's quite normal for articles to belong to two projects equally, botanic gardens are as much about botany as horticulture. To take an extreme example, are you seriously suggesting that Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew is not a "botany-related article" and should be removed from WP:PLANTS? FlagSteward (talk) 13:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I know very little about Pepperoncini, but the article does seem to be discussing a single cultivar, a member of a cultivar group, whether or not the cultivar taxonomy is correct in that there's an actual cultivar group, I'm not sure. I'd have to look it up, and really wouldn't know where to start with cultivated plants. If it is just a product of pickling, then yes, it should be removed and the cultivar infobox should also be removed, linking to the "parent" cultivar that is pickled to create it.
On the botanic gardens, yes, we include botany-related topics, but most botanic gardens serve on the purpose of being a showcase. Are non-research zoos included in the animal project? I believe there's been discussion about this among the WikiProject Plants members and it was decided to not include most botanic gardens and arboreta in our scope. The exception you pointed to, Kew Gardens, is because of their long history of being more than a showcase. There's so much taxonomic work done there that WP:PLANTS can't ignore it. So you can see why we consider most botanic gardens to be non-related to the study of plants (botany) and more of a pretty place to go visit or a horticultural endeavor. --Rkitko (talk) 14:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Zoos are a bit different, as the single word in English covers everything from "zoological gardens", places of serious study, to Barnum-type enterprises which might nicely described by the translation of the German name "animal gardens". The cost of keeping a couple of lions means that even "serious" places rely on people coming through the doors. Plants however are much cheaper to run :-) and a botanic garden can be funded by a university say, so they tend to be a distinct breed apart from "normal" gardens and parks. I'd profoundly disagree with your weasel-worded (and non-WP:CSB?) statement that "most" botanic gardens are purely for show - off the top of my head I can't think of any in the UK that aren't connected with a university or Kew, and that haven't been used for "serious" botany at some stage. And WP:PLANTS merely requires "botany" rather than "taxonomy", remember. I suspect the same applies to most of Europe - they were mostly set up in the early days when there was still a lot of "easy" taxonomy to be done - and even in the New World (I'm thinking Australia in particular) they may have been set up initially as a source of germplasm from Europe, but then made important contributions to understanding the native fauna. In fact, in the UK it goes the other way - there's quite a lot of "botany" happening outside the formal settings of the few botanic gardens, many of the National Collections of garden genera are in private gardens for instance, and there's a couple of examples of some private collections attaining such importance that they end up in some kind of "Big Botany" structure. To take a different example - not every university in the Universities Project can be a Harvard, some are almost exclusively teaching organisations, but just being called a "university" stands for something, it distinguishes them from 10,000's of other educational establishments. Since botanic gardens represent less than 0.1% of all public "gardens", I'd say that tag is a meaningful indication that some kind of botany has gone/goes on there, and that the onus should be to prove that it doesn't, rather than the other way round. BTW - if you're talking about this discussion, I'd say that's far from a consensus. Perhaps continue over there? FlagSteward (talk) 15:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi! Sorry it's taken me so long to reply. I've been busy with work and had to do an OS reinstall on my laptop. I love that fresh new OS smell. Anyway, yes, let's continue this conversation over at the WP:PLANTS assessment talk page. I'll also leave a general note on the main WP:PLANTS talk page that we're discussing the scope of the project since I don't think many members have that on their watchlist. Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 22:50, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Catania

Hi. Thanks for your comments. I have replied to them in the Catania discussion page. Cheers, Drunkpiper (talk) 14:32, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Help please

Editing. Technocracy movement Regards, skip sievert (talk) 21:25, 14 May 2008 (UTC)


Yes, I'd also ask you to intervene if you can FlagSteward, please just look at what Skip's been doing and do something about it, because I'm tired of having the same stupid arguments and getting nowhere. --Hibernian (talk) 17:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Flavored liquor merger proposal

Hi. I left you a response to your comment on Flavored liquor. Have a good day! --Willscrlt (Talk) 13:01, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you could also help me get the assessments to work for our WikiProject, too. I created the project banner and thought I set everything up correctly, but nothing is being categorized. I did all of that nearly 1.5 years ago, so my learning curve will be quite steep without someone to help advise me. Thanks if you can. Thanks for considering it if you can't. --Willscrlt (Talk) 13:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Pocol

I appreciate what you have done on expansion of Pocol. Italian cities and locations are not exactly my strong suits. All I was doing was trying to close out some loose ends I have on a bobsleigh, luge, and skeleton project that I have been working on since late April 2007. Chris (talk) 13:29, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Italy

I'm not sure why you keep bringing frazioni up. Italy would be one of the very very last countries on the list for even coverage. It has an article on every comune and 95% of these are still barely beyond a line. For Italy priority is clearly developing the articles on communes rather than starting hamlets or small villages within them. Howveer most countries in Africa and Asia have nowhere evne near 5% of what Italy has and these countries will be the specific target. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 12:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Contursi Terme

Updated DYK query On 5 June 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Contursi Terme, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 13:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)