User talk:Materialscientist

Please leave your message at the bottom of this page. I shall reply wherever you prefer (my usual habit is to reply here if the answer is short). If I replied on your talk page it means I am watching it, and there is no need to add {{talkback}} template or quote the previous message.

Request for an article draft

I notice that you have lots of little icons for your work on materials. Could you take a look at User:Σ/Coal ball and give me some feedback on it? I would greatly appreciate it. --Σ ^talk_contribs 03:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. Distribution needs work. I would also elaborate individual sections, put the lead into the article and only when the article is more or less finished write the lead as its summary. Materialscientist (talk) 13:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK reform

I'm glad you removed the Ghumdan Palace article as I was thinking its time for DYK reform and has presented me with an opportunity to do so. This quality issue happens all too frequently and some of the articles going through are rather embarrasing. I've addressed it here. As you know I am not at all phased by the DYK process but for the fact I enjoy collaborating with the others, like having a bank of half decent articles i can refer to and that some of the articles are looked over by yourself which is a positive thing as issues may be identified. I must admit that I personally ignore DYK on the front page unless I see an article which looks particularly interesting.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:49, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Most related discussions are localized at WT:DYK. My own attitude to DYK has changed over time and I'm spending time on other fronts (photoshopping images is a recent hobby). What saddens me though it hostility, which is spreading from FAC to DYK - instead of working together and improve, more editors are enjoying scolding each other for any mistake they find instead of fixing it. The collaborative atmosphere of the old DYK is what is worth restoring. Materialscientist (talk) 12:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Strong support! I didn't even engage in the latest discussion, other than say the more concise the better. If you want to improve another pic, I didn't get the one on top of Messiah Part III straight. (The article is now on the Main page, but with the other pic.) - As for DYK, I reviewed more than 80 articles in 2011, and found all but 4 fine, at least after discussions. One even made it to GA, the one with the longest discussion. I don't see the overall lament justified, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I lament more about the loss of valuable helpers, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:24, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I've done something with File:Unionskirche Idstein Revelation.jpg, but don't see how to put it into the hook on the main page. Materialscientist (talk) 12:49, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Don't misunderstand me, it shouldn't go to the hook, the other one is better, Handel's own writing. Thanks for the great improvement! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:53, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I agree. But something needs to change. If articles by the most active contributors frequently have problems then the likelihoods of new contributors getting it right is slim. The only value I place on DYK now is collaboration with the others and to just have a bank of articles I can refer to as half decent. Personally I would support scrapping the whole DYK scheme as as you say its not like it used to be, I think it could be replaced with some not too disimilar but much better. Anyway the did you know itself has become redundant as practically nobody is going to know (or care) about most of the hooks going through. If we don't change it we are increasingly going to get complaints and demoralising comments about it to the point that it will have to stop anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:03, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Look at the pictured hook right now (mentioned above): for some people the fact will be all too common, but for others good to know. (The wording was changed, though, I wonder why, to "from text in " instead of "on text from". How can a chorus be "from text"? I am used to "opera on a libretto".) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:15, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Looking at it again, Ghumdan Palace does have a lot of problems so that was an appropriate yank. As to the shifting wind at dyk in general... The bitey tone of some bugs me. The "dull hook" comments bug me, too, as dullness is quite subjective. But a very positive side of dyk, for the writer, is the relatively fast feedback from a fresh set of eyes... the whole collaborative thing that turns me on. Unfortunately, there is burn out amongst the heavy-lifters. And we lack a mechanism of watching out for and mentoring the newbies. At one time, giving out cookies was a way to say thank you to dyk contributors, certainly a counter-weight to some of the demoralizing statements. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:51, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

You deserve a cookie for that! As said above, I reviewed more than 80 articles and found it an uplifting experience in very diverse fields of interest, some of which I never entered before, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:57, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

dashes

What was wrong with the dashes at printing press? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 17:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Nerd

Materialnerd! Get out of your mother's basement and get a life-leave me the hell alone. I suggest you go suck off Barek Obama bin Laden and Fagreterion. BoyWCGSOmega (talk) 22:50, 23 July 2011 (UTC)