Jump to content

User talk:Was a bee

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by PBS (talk | contribs) at 20:55, 1 November 2017 (→‎Tree lists). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

The Signpost: 11 December 2013

WP:Anatomy quarterly update (#1)

WP:Anatomy quarterly update (#1)

Next
Released: Fourth quarter, 2013
Editor: LT910001

Hello WP:ANATOMY user! This is the first of what I hope will be ongoing quarterlies, documenting the current state of WP:ANATOMY, current projects and items of interest, and any relevant news. I'd greatly value feedback on this, and if you think I've missed something, or don't wish to receive this again, please leave a note on my talkpage

What's new
What's going on
How can I contribute?
Quarterly focus - GA nominations

I would like to take some time on this first quarterly to evaluate the state of the project. We have the benefit of having a relatively-small group of articles that are, for the most part, relatively non-controversial. Additionally, for the majority of our articles, it may indeed be possible to create an article that reflects a significant proportion of the published literature. This is quite distinct from other projects.

However, it appears we only have 5 GAs (Anatomy, Brain, Clitoris, Human tooth, and Leonardo da Vinci) and 4 FAs (Immune system, Hippocampus, Cerebellum, and Resurrectionists in the United Kingdom), none of which relate to purely anatomical items, which constitute most of our mass. By 'anatomical items' I mean muscles, nerves, bones, blood vessels, veins, foramina, and so on, that constitute the vast majority of our articles. In fact, we only have one 'system' (Immune system) at FA class, and none at GA class. We indeed only have 70 articles out over 4,000 at B-class. This scarcity is, I believe, for the following reasons: (1) lack of model articles (2) lack of appropriate guidelines, and (3) general sparsity of sourcing on many articles. How may these be addressed?

  1. Nominating good articles. In addition to suspensory muscle of the duodenum I will be working on Mylohyoid muscle, Genioglossus, Foramen spinosum and an as-yet undecided article.
  2. Revamping the MEDMOS guidelines for Anatomical articles to make them more appropriate. That discussion is here.
  3. Using books as sources. Books are readily available in libraries and have the superb quality of being able to aggregate information, which can be used to source thousands of anatomical articles.
  4. Collateralising sourcing. Anatomical sources often refer to several structures in a single source. Therefore an editor on one article could quickly add a source to another two articles in a related topic. This incremental approach will hopefully accrue for future editors
  5. Tagging articles for cleanup, to let future editors know to use sources
  6. Templates, which will soon be available, to post on the wall of new editors thanking them for their edits and encouraging the use of sources.

I hope that we are able to revitalise this project. Wikipedia has the capacity to become an excellent resource for anatomical information. I again welcome feedback on this quarterly or any aspects therein on the talk page for the quarterly, on my talkpage, or on the WP Anatomy talk page here. Kind regards, LT910001 (talk)

  • This has been transcluded to the talk pages of all active WP:ANATOMY users.

FMA template

Hi there. I saw you added the FMA template, this is great! I was wondering on what your opinion was on adding similar links to other kinds of articles, and what procedure should be followed from doing this - for example, to add a link to the Gene Ontology on the Apoptosis page. Disclosure: I work on many of these community ontologies. I also wanted to mention that I curate a set of cross-references between FMA and Wikipedia (via another ontologies), if this is at all useful to you I would be happy to help. Not sure what the correct forum to go through here, so I thought I would ask on your page, apologies if this is not the correct place. Thanks! Cmungall (talk) 23:43, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cmungall. Thank you for message! I'm glad to see your message. I know the your cross-species ontology project. Your experience is great benefit for Wikipedia project. There are several ways to put scientific identifiers into Wikipedia infobox. The most simplest way is to request adding section (e.g. GO ID section) at each infobox note (e.g. Template talk:Infobox anatomy). After that, adding GO ID to the article. This is the simplest way. What I'm doing is like this.
More systematic way is to use Wikidata. I don't know in what style you can collaborate with Wikimedia project, however I'll put here basic procedure of editing Wikidata anyway (if you are not interested in editing Wikidata, please skip this section). For inserting new data into Wikidata, we have to request new property (e.g. request for TA ID) at wikidata:Wikidata:Property proposal/Natural science. After that, adding statements to each item. This step can been done by manually with hands or semi-automatically with bots. (An example of well developed item is, for example, wikidata:Q128581. You can access to this Data item from left side bar of the breast cancer article in Wikipedia). Once data is stored in Wikidata, all Wikipedia project can retrieve these data easily. For example, if the code {{#property:MeSH ID}} is put in the article breast cancer in English Wikipedia, it returns text D001943 (for details, see meta:Wikidata/Notes/Inclusion syntax). Major part of data in Wikipedia infoboxes will be someday replaced by this centralized data storage system, Wikidata.
Speaking in a straightforward manner, if you think it is ok to export cross-species ontology data into Wikidata, I think it would be ideal collaboration (not only for English Wikipedia, but also all over the world). There are many potential partners are listed in Wikidata (wikidata:Wikidata:Data collaborators). I think you are very good candidate of partner.
Possibly my response was pointless. More message is always welcome. Adding to here, good forums for you would be... WP:Anatomy, WP:Medicine and wikidata:Wikidata:Community_portal. Thanks! --Was a bee (talk) 06:33, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 December 2013

The Signpost: 25 December 2013

The Signpost: 01 January 2014

The Signpost: 08 January 2014

The Signpost: 15 January 2014

The Signpost: 22 January 2014

VF source request

Hi there, I have been looking to Vandal Fighter latest source to make some modifications, but the svn link has been put offline. Can you help? Thank you in advance, M/ (talk) 21:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi M7. I posted about that at the project talk page though, here is my old wesite[1]. After downloading the Jar file, change the file extension from ".jar" to ".zip". Then you will be able to get the archived source. I hope you can get source code. thanks. --Was a bee (talk) 18:01, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. --M/ (talk) 14:55, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Anatomy quarterly newsletter

WP:Anatomy quarterly update (#2)

Previous -- Next
Released: First quarter, 2014
Updated cleanup listing and recent changes list in third quarter, 2014
Editor: LT910001

Hello WP:ANATOMY participant! This is the second quarterly update of goings-on in WP:ANATOMY, documenting the current state of WP:ANATOMY, current projects and items of interest, and any relevant news. I'd greatly value feedback on this, and if you think I've missed something, or don't wish to receive this again, please leave a note on my talkpage or remove your name from the mailing list

What's new
What's going on
How can I contribute?
  • Reword anatomical jargon: jargon is widespread and not helpful to lay readers.
  • Contribute on our talk page
  • Continue to add sources, content, and improve anatomical articles!
  • Replace images with better images from Wikipedia commons, or if there are too many images, remove some low-quality ones
Quarterly focus - Where to edit?
One of our two new featured images! (Also featured on the Signpost)

On any given week we have at least 4-10 editors making significant contributions to our articles, with probably more than double this making minor edits. As an editor, I am often wondering: with so many articles, where to start? There is so much to be done (as always, on Wikipedia!), and I aim here to provide a comprehensive list of venues within our project. If I've missed any, please let us know on the WikiProject Anatomy talk page.

An editor might edit:

  • By importance. A user can use our assessment table to view articles by their importance and class. The vital articles project provides a list of designated 'Vital articles' for Wikipedia.
  • By popularity. One way to edit is to edit the most popular pages -- the majority of these need help, and editing is sure to bring benefit to many users.
  • By need. There is always cleanup that needs to be done, whether commenting on mergers, adding infoboxes or adding images. A cleanup list of all tagged articles is now available here: [2]
  • By interest. A series of inter-project categories has been developed to help facilitate inter-Wiki and inter-professional collaboration. These categories sort our articles into organs, system, gross anatomy, neuroanatomy, and several other categories. This should offer a buffet of articles for any interested editors! See here for more details.
  • By topic. Wikipedia's anatomical categories may provide impetus, as may editing a suite of related-articles, using a parent article such as ear for direction. A collection of series are slowly being rolled-out, including one for epithelia and for articles about the gastrointestinal wall, which also act as groups of topics. Templates, as documented on our main page, provide a similar categorisation.
  • By demand. Discussions relating to Anatomy are frequent occurrences on the talk pages for WPMED and WP:ANATOMY. Such topics almost always cry out for more editing.
  • By recent changes. One way to choose a destination for editing is to check the recent changes, revert vandalism, integrate/source edits, or generally collaborate in improving articles that are receiving contributions from other editors. This can be found in the here.
  • By chance. A user is always welcome to improve articles that they randomly 'bump into' by Wiki-surfing or by having bumped for other reasons into a particular article or topic that needs improvement

Delivered on behalf of WikiProject Anatomy by User:Mdann52, using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation join the new Physiology Wikiproject!

Physiology gives us an understanding of how and why things in the field of medicine happen. Together, let us jumpstart the project and get it going. Our energy is all it needs.

Based on the long felt gap for categorization and improvization of WP:MED articles relating to the field of physiology, the new WikiProject Physiology has been created. WikiProject Physiology is still in its infancy and needs your help. On behalf of a group of editors striving to improve the quality of physiology articles here on Wikipedia, I would like to invite you to come on board and participate in the betterment of physiology related articles. Help us to jumpstart this WikiProject.

  • Feel free to leave us a message at any time on the WikiProkect Physiology talk page. If you are interested in joining the project yourself, there is a participant list where you can sign up. Please leave a message on the talk page if you have any problems, suggestions, would like review of an article, need suggestions for articles to edit, or would like some collaboration when editing!
  • You can tag the talk pages of relevant articles with {{WikiProject Physiology|class=|importance=}} with your assessment of the article class and importance alongwith. Please note that WP:Physiology, WP:Physio, WP:Phy can be used interchangeably.
  • You will make a big difference to the quality of information by adding reliable sources. Sourcing physiology articles is essential and makes a big difference to the quality of articles. And, while you're at it, why not use a book to source information, which can source multiple articles at once!
  • We try and use a standard way of arranging the content in each article. That layout is here. These headings let us have a standard way of presenting the information in anatomical articles, indicate what information may have been forgotten, and save angst when trying to decide how to organise an article. That said, this might not suit every article. If in doubt, be bold!
  • Why not try and strive to create a good article! Physiology related articles are often small in scope, have available sources, and only a limited amount of research available that is readily presentable!
  • Your contributions to the WikiProject page, related categories and templates is also welcome.
  • To invite other editors to this WikiProject, copy and past this template (with the signature):
  • To welcome editors of physiology articles, copy and past this template (with the signature):
  • You can feel free to contact us on the WikiProkect Physiology talk page if you have any problems, or wish to join us. You can also put your suggestions there and discuss the scope of participation.

Hoping for your cooperation! DiptanshuTalk 13:03, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into the local language
The Cure Award
In 2013 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you so much for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date medical information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do!

We are wondering about the educational background of our top medical editors. Would you please complete a quick 5-question survey? (please only fill this out if you received the award)

Thanks again :) --Ocaasi, Doc James and the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation

A barnstar for you!

The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
For all the wonderful work you've been doing for WP:Anatomy. Your images are really helpful to the project. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 13:46, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was meaning to ask you how you got all those images from Blender. I haven't got blender to import .obj files myself, so I tried using the link function at Anatomography to create rotating gifs. They work and look fine, but won't be made into thumbnails. Currently I put one over at Quadriceps, but almost none of the others are working:
Is there any simple way to fix this, and what am I doing wrong in Blender when I can't import them - all I see is a gray square?
Thanks -- -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 13:51, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi CFCF. I'm glad to barnstar :D Thank you.
  • The problem of animation thumbnail comes from image size (commons:COM:MAXTHUMB). Practically, I'm using "450 pixel * 450 pixel and 60 frames or 72 frames". This size can work well always.
  • When importing polygons into Blender, original Bodyparts3d data is extreamly big. My importing method is as follows...
1. From menu bar, select File -> Import -> Wavefront (.obj)
2. Move to "BodyParts3D_3.0_obj_95" forder (polygon reduction rate = 95.0%, high quality mesh)
3. Set "Clamp size": 50 (scalling size of object) Sometimes this value must be "10", rarely "1" or "1000" (i dont know why, this is strange.)
4. Set "Forward": Y Forwad (direction of mesh)
5. Set "UP": Z Up (direction of mesh)
6. Press "Import Object"
In some day, I want to make simple manual for this kind of tips. --Was a bee (talk) 20:48, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a whole lot, I've seen your guides and they helped me fix some of the images. These things aren't always so straight forward. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 09:36, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because you thanked me

You thanked me for one of my recent edits, so here is a heart-felt...
 YOU'RE WELCOME, Was a bee!
It's a pleasure, and I sincerely hope that you enjoy your continued improvement of this inspiring encyclopedia! – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX!

08:52, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Integument, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Shell and Rind. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:11, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

The Golden Doubloon of Anatomy
You have been awarded the prestigious Golden Doubloon for your contributions to anatomy articles on Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions!

Your edits on anatomical articles, especially images and infoboxes, are very much appreciated! For your services, I hereby present to you one of the newly-minted anatomical doubloons, of which only a few exist! --Tom (LT) (talk) 21:45, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Anatomy Newsletter

WP:Anatomy quarterly update (#3)

Previous -- Next
Released: 1 November, 2014
Editor: Tom (LT)

Hello WP:Anatomy participant! This is the third quarterly update, documenting what's going on in WikiProkect Anatomy, news, current projects and other items of interest. I'd greatly value feedback on this, and if you think I've missed something, or don't wish to receive this again, please leave a note on my talkpage or remove your name from the mailing list

What's new
What's going on
  • We fly past 10,000 articles (now already up to 10,150). Why is this important? Articles under our scope are automatically included in popular pages, the cleanup list, and will be included as the recent changes list is updated.
  • A discussion about the formatting of infoboxes.
  • A lot of editing on the heart article -- can it make it to GA?
  • The medical newsletter, WP:PULSE finds its feet, and Anatomy and Physiology are featured as a subsection!
  • A new WP:WikiProject Animal anatomy (WP:ANAN) is created to focus on animal anatomy.
How can I contribute?
  • Welcome new editors! We have a constant stream of new editors who are often eager to work on certain articles.
  • We are always looking to collaborate! If you're looking for editors to collaborate with, let us know on our talk page!
  • Continue to add high-class reliable sources
  • Browse images on WikiCommons to improve the quality of images we use on many articles.
Quarterly focus - Anatomical terminology

Anatomical terminology is an essential component to all our articles. It is necessary to describe structures accurately and without ambiguity. It can also be extremely confusing and, let's face it, it's likely you too were confused too before you knew what was going on ("It's all Greek to me!" you may have said, fairly accurately).

In the opinion of this editor, it's very important that we try hard to describe anatomy in a way that is both technically accurate and accessible. The majority of our readers are lay readers and will not be fluent in terminology. Anatomy is a thoroughly interesting discipline, but it shouldn't be 'locked away' only to those who are fluent in the lingo – exploring anatomy should not be limited by education, technical-level English fluency, or unfamiliarity with its jargon. Anatomical terminology is one barrier to anatomical literacy.

Here are four ways that we can help improve the readability of our anatomical articles.

  1. Substitute. Use words readers are familiar with -- there is no need to use anatomical terminology unless necessary!
    Innervated by
    The nerve that supplies X is...
  2. Explain. When using terminology, remember readers will likely not understand what you mean, so consider adding an explanation and providing context. Use wikilinks for terms that a reader may not know.
    "The triceps extends the arm" may not be readily understood. A small addition may help the reader:
    "The triceps extends the arm, straightening it". Consider:
  3. Separate. Do not use long, complicated sentences. Don't write discursive, long comparisons unless needed. Start with simple information first, then get progressively more complex. Separate information by paragraph and subsection. Bite-sized information is much more easier to digest for readers who don't have a solid anatomical foundation
  4. Eliminate. Not all information is necessary on every article. Hatnotes are a simple and effective way to direct readers to another article. Don't provide long lists of synonyms of names for structures that an article isn't about. If a sentence has been paraphrased to the hilt, consider that several editors are indicating it may need to be simplified.
    "The other branches of the trigeminal nerve are the opthalmic nerve (nervus opthalmicus) and mandibular nerve (nervus mandibularis)"
    "The other branches of the trigeminal nerve are the opthalmic nerve and mandibular nerve" is much more easily digestible

This essay is provided in full on WP:ANATSIMPLIFY.

This has been transcluded to the talk pages of all active WP:ANATOMY users. To opt-out, leave a message on the talkpage of Tom (LT) or remove your name from the mailing list

ごあいさつ

Wikipediaを作ってくれてありがとう賞
はじめまして。HP拝読しました。Wikipedia新入者で右も左もわかりませんが、翻訳(しかできないもの)で貢献したいと思っています。どうぞよろしくお願いします。 SkyDaisy9 (talk) 14:37, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Imperial Household Agency Hospital

Please help create an English article of 宮内庁病院. I'm not fluent in Japanese so I can't do it. If you don't know how to translate all of the text, leave some out. Create the article here: Imperial Household Agency Hospital --Hipposcrashed (talk) 02:47, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Hipposcrashed:. Yes, I am fluent in Japanese, but I am not fluent in English! OK, but I'll try what I can do
Although this hospital does not have even website (this doesn't mean the hospital is not famous. On the contrary, most Japanese know well this hospital. Because many royals were born at this hospital). As far as I searched, offical English name for ja:宮内庁病院 seems to be Hospital of the Imperial Household (source: [4]). What do you think? --Was a bee (talk) 23:38, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cartilaginous joint, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spine. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gray's Anatomy now in Wikidata

Hi WasABee! I was reviewing recent changes + saw you'd insert some Gray's Anatomy subject numbers. You may or may not be following the discussion @ WT:ANAT but the crux is these numbers are now present in Wikidata: [5]. Not entirely sure if that's useful, but thought you should know. Cheers, --Tom (LT) (talk) 03:30, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear. The very next page I go to on Wikidata is one you have contributed to on this very topic! [6] --Tom (LT) (talk) 03:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tom. Coincidence :D. I'm including WT:ANAT in my watch lists and I just commented at that property at WikiData. --Was a bee (talk) 03:47, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A cupcake for you!

Thanks for your work on Category talk:Anatomy external link templates! —PC-XT+ 09:54, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you PC-XT! I'm glad. Nom nom nom. --Was a bee (talk) 09:18, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Genes categories

Following Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_May_30#Category:Genes_on_chromosome, would you like to do speedy nominations on the stub sub-categories? Use {{cfr-speedy}} and list them at WP:CFDS. – Fayenatic London 14:21, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Fayenatic london: Helpful advice. I tried to nominate child stub categories. Thank you. --Was a bee (talk) 15:20, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That looks perfect, thanks. – Fayenatic London 16:06, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template editing

Hello wasabi,

Would the WP:TPE userright be useful to you? Do you meet the criteria described on that page? Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Helpful advice. I'll examine that. Thanks! --21:16, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Anatomy Newsletter #4

WikiProject Anatomy Newsletter #4

Previous
Released: 1 July, 2015
Editor: Tom (LT)

Hello WikiProject Anatomy participant! This is the fourth update, documenting what's going on in WikiProject Anatomy, news, current projects and other items of interest. We've had a quiet time over the last half-year or so, so I've slowed down the release of this newsletter and will probably release the next one around the end of the year. If you'd like to provide some feedback, if you think I've missed something, or don't wish to receive this again, please leave a note on my talkpage or remove your name from the mailing list

What's new
What's going on
The vermiform appendix, seen in the bottom left and the cause of much anguish when inflammed, stirs up an interesting discussion.
  • Should Vermiform appendix be retitled to its more common name (Appendix)? The discussion continues!
  • A large number of "back end" changes are made, and integration with Wikidata continues -- see the focus for more.
  • Our set of cranial nerve-related articles receive a review by a subject expert
How can I contribute?
Our articles on the 13 12 cranial nerves receive a review from a subject expert
Issue focus - technical changes

This issue was originally going to focus on how far we've come as a project. However, that encouraging news can wait until next issue, as there are simply too many changes going on at the "back end" of our project not to write about. What do I mean by "back end"? I mean changes that are not necessarily visible to readers, but may have a significant impact on the way we edit or on future edits.

Templates

A number of visible changes have been made to our templates. Firstly, the way our templates have been linked together has changed. Previously, this was a small bar with single-letter links. This has been replaced by a light-coloured box contained within all our templates with fully-worded links, which provides links to relevant anatomy and medical templates. This should make life a lot easier, particularly for students and other readers who are struggling with the vastness of anatomical systems and their related diseases and treatments.

As part of this, almost all our templates have been reviewed and cleaned up. The previously confusing colour scheme has been removed and colour standardised. The titles have been simplified. References to "identifiers" in the titles of navigation boxes (such as Gray's Anatomy and Terminologia Anatomica numbers) have been removed. Where possible, the wiki-code of templates has been updated to give a cleaner, more standardised, format that is hopefully more friendly to new editors. The cleanup continues , please feel free to contribute or propose templates which need attention.

Anatomy infobox

Most of our articles have an infobox. Previously, there were 11 separate infoboxes for different fields, such as muscles, nerves and embryology. These have been united so that at the "back end", every template will take formatting directly from the main anatomy infobox -- however at the "front end", there is little difference for readers. This will make future changes much easier -- including adding new fields, formatting, and reordering the contents. Several changes have already been made: infoboxes now link to a relevant anatomical terminology article; contents are now divided into 'Identifiers' and 'Details' headings, making it easier to grasp content for new readers; and new fields have been added, including Greek and UBERON, with several more under discussion.

External links

An editor has reviewed all our template-based external links. These are the links that often fill the "External links" category, and sometimes used as citations. At least thirty different links sets, with the number of links stretching into the thousands, have been fixed, and if not functioning, deleted. A number of non-functioning dead links (with no archived websites available), and one or two others, have been deleted. This helps keep our 'external links' section relevant and functioning for those readers who want extra information about articles.

Wikidata

Perhaps our most important change has been integration with Wikidata. This is because of both its current uses and potential future uses. Wikidata is a service related to Wikipedia focusing on storing information. Data relating to a Wikipedia item (such as a muscle or bone, or even a template) can have related "structured" infomation stored systematically alongside it. For example, a muscle can have information about its embryological origin, nerve supply, and the relevant sections of Terminologica Anatomica (TA) stored alongside it. Much information that was stored within articles on infoboxes is now stored on Wikidata, including the TA, TH, and TE fields. An immediate benefit is that Wikipedias in every language will (as they update their own infoboxes, be able to automatically include this information. New data can be entered in a much easier format, and data can be batch entered by bots making future updates much easier Future uses include data visualisation. I personally am looking forward to the day when a reader can view a wikidata-based "tree", clicking mesoderm and seeing all of the derived structures, then selecting the intermediate mesoderm, then Pronephric duct, mesonephric duct and vas deferens. The possibilities of using Wikidata for data visualisation are really quite encouraging!

Our next issue will focus on how far WikiProject Anatomy has come in the past 2 years.

This has been transcluded to the talk pages of all active WP:ANATOMY users. To opt-out, leave a message on the talkpage of Tom (LT) or remove your name from the mailing list
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Integration of GoogleTrans gadget with Wikipedia Beta Translation system

Hi there Was A bee,

I still remember how nicely you developed a Japanese language help page for my GoogleTrans gadget several years ago.

Your animated GIF has been migrated to all the HELP pages and is really good at explaining to people on how to change the language on the gadget

I just thought I'd tell you that there is a major new extension to the gadget whereby it is now integrated into the new beta translation feature of Wikipedia.

This is now in my test version which can be accessed via the javascript:

mw.loader.load('//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Endo999/testvector.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript');

Basically, within the new Content Translation system you can select text in the destination language column, hold down the CTRL-ALT keys at the same time and then the paragraph you have selected will be translated and the HTML markup will be kept. This aids translation.

Anyway, I am unsure whether you are still interested in translation aids, but the description of it is at en:User:Endo999/GoogleTrans#Integration_With_Wikipedia_Beta_Translation_System:_Test

Thanks again for your help several years ago.

Endo999 (talk) 14:30, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

I found what you have edited are really helpful. Thanks!

Xiaoying zhong (talk) 03:12, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Imperial Household Agency Hospital

I'm so sorry for not replying. This is awkward. I just checked my watchlist and realized I have been watching your talkpage but I didn't know that you replied because I thought I would be notified. But if you still want help to create a page Hospital of the Imperial Household, I will agree with anything you say because you know Japanese better.--Hipposcrashed (talk) 17:31, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Hipposcrashed: thank you for message. Never mind. I don't understand well about this messaging/ping system. Well, I myself don't write hospital articles (because of my poor knowledge about hospital, emperor system and especially English!). But I can support you in some aspects of Japanese language matter. So don't mind. thank you :) --Was a bee (talk) 05:12, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay if you don't want to.--Hipposcrashed (talk) 12:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, an open access peer reviewed journal with no charges, invites you to participate.

Hi

Did you know about Wikiversity Journal of Medicine? It is an open access, peer reviewed medical journal, with no publication charges. We welcome you to have a look. Feel free to participate.

You can participate in any one or more of the following ways:

The future of this journal as a separate Wikimedia project is under discussion and the name can be changed suitably. Currently a voting for the same is underway. Please cast your vote in the name you find most suitable. We would be glad to receive further suggestions from you. It is also acceptable to mention your votes in the wide-reach@wikiversityjournal.org email list. Please note that the voting closes on 16th August, 2016, unless protracted by consensus, due to any reason.

-from Diptanshu.D (talk · contribs · count) and others of the Editorial Board, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine.

DiptanshuTalk 10:12, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Anatomy newsletter #5

WP:Anatomy newsletter (#5)

Previous - Next
Released: November 2016
Editor: Tom (LT)

Hello WP:Anatomy participant! This is our fifth newsletter, documenting what's going on in WikiProject Anatomy, news, current projects and other items of interest. There hasn't been too much worthy of news, and I have less time to dedicate to this project, so I've slowed down the release of this newsletter.

I value feedback, and if you think I've missed something, or don't wish to receive this again, please leave a note on my talk page, or remove your name from the mailing list

What's new
How can I contribute?
  • Participate in discussions - a number of discussions such as those on our talk page or about our infobox would benefit from your opinion!
  • Continue to add content to our articles
  • Collaborate and discuss with other editors - many hands make light work!
Focus - how far we've come

How far have we come since our first newsletter... the answer is quite a lot! Here goes:

  • Hundreds to thousands of articles improved and standardised by many, many editors.
  • 14 new good articles created or added to our project [8]
  • Improved quality of our articles - subjectively and objectively. GAs quadrupled from 5 to 16, B-class articles doubles from 62 to 115, C-class article well on the way to trebling from 219 to 611, Start-class increased from 1,082 to 1,570.
  • Tens to hundreds of mergers performed between tiny, unedited articles - a remnant of our Gray's Anatomy (1918) heritage.
  • Layout guidelines changed and layout standardised for the majority of our articles
  • In the project space:
  • Active integration with wikidata in our infoboxes
  • Overhaul of all of our navboxes
  • Review and integration of all of our templates
  • External link templates reviewed to ensure they all work
  • To help improve anatomical literacy:

These are substantial improvements and my thanks go out to our many editors who played a part in this. These improvements are almost always the result of consensus, compromise, collaboration and discussion between multiple editors.

I hope we can continue to improve in the future. How can you help? Continue to edit, add content, and create a welcoming atmosphere so that new editors will join us.

Well done to us all, and the many anonymous editors who've helped along the way!

This has been transcluded to the talk pages of all active WP:ANATOMY users. To opt-out, leave a message on the talkpage of Tom (LT) or remove your name from the mailing list

Message delivered on behalf of WikiProject Anatomy by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:21, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Was a bee. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hi. One of your edits added citations to a journal with a DOI starting 10.4236 - this is a publisher called Scientific Research Publishing, which publishes predatory open access journals.

As someone who regularly adds citations to the academic literature, could I ask you please to spend a few minutes looking over Beall's list please? The more people who are aware of this the better.

Thanks, Guy (Help!) 09:17, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JzG: Thank you informing me. I set notification for users and readers at image pages in Commons. I hope this makes thing a bit better. --Was a bee (talk) 18:35, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Chromosome 1 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 2 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 3 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Chromosome 10 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 11 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 12 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 16 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 17 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 18 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 19 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 20 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 4 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 5 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 6 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 7 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 8 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
Chromosome 9 (human)
added a link pointing to Stalk
X chromosome
added a link pointing to Stalk
Y chromosome
added a link pointing to Stalk

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:07, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tree lists

Ahnentafel of Sigmund Christoph von Waldburg-Zeil-Trauchburg

I see you have been working on Module:Sandbox/Was a bee/tree. Perhaps you can help me with a problem (or at least give me a definitive answer).

I have recently updated Wikipedia:Family trees, which summarise different types of methods available for creating family trees. Many of them are based on the ideas behind ahnentafel (where ancestors can be listed by a number). Wikipedia has some dedicated ahnentafel templates: see {{ahnentafel/doc}}. But I wanted one that would go out to 9 generations (up to ahnentafel number 511) — the numbers will be familiar to anyone used to base 2.

To do that I used {{Tree list}} and have in the last couple of days written {{ahnentafel-tree}}. It works (with a bug on the length of the mother when it is over a certain number of places away from the subject) see Ancestry of Elizabeth II#Ancestry tree.

Another user posted to my talk page has asked if this tree is standard format see User talk:PBS#Ahnentafel-tree. I posted to the users talk page that I don't know, but thinking about it I could make it appear like a standard American ahnentafel if there was a mirror to the "final branch". I have asked at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Mirror of template:Tree list/final branch for help with this, but to date have not had an answer. I would appreciate it if you could have a look at my posting at village pump and express an opinion there. -- PBS (talk) 20:55, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Was_a_bee&oldid=808260807"