User talk:ElCharismo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, ElCharismo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 16:21, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

1 News
2 Talk to Me
- 2.1 Congressional delegations
- 2.2 COTW
  - 2.2.1 Vacation
3 Wikipedia_talk:Censorship
4 COTW Project
5 Congress style guide
6 Congressional Articles for Improvement Drive
7 Current mac project collaboration
8 List of United States Representatives from Foo

[edit] News

WikiProject Macintosh
The goal of this Project is to improve every Apple Computer- and Macintosh-related article to featured article status.
OS topics - 0% done
Game topics - 0% done
Biography topics - 0% done
Hardware topics - 1.12% done
Software topics - 0% done
Business topics - 0% done
Current Mac collaboration:
Apple II family
Project News
Hardware categorization discussion seeks your opinions. There is a straw poll to see what usage to adopt as far as copyrighted items that begin with a lowercase letter (like iTunes, iMac, iBook, etc.). Wikipedia:Macintosh collaboration "goes live"; this collaboration will replace the improvement focus.
Spread the word! {{Project Macintosh}}
This box: view • talk • edit

[edit] Talk to Me

[edit] Congressional delegations

I love that you're working on the Congressional Delegations articles. We need every ounce of help on them!!!

However, the extra vertical white space ( , etc.) looks terrible on my screen. :(. I'd used {{TOCright}} on some of the delegations because it would line up on the right of the Senate list. Clearly, however, that looked terrible to you. I don't know how to make it look good for everybody because I'm not that talented a Wikipedian.

By the way, join the Project: Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Congress! —Mark Adler (markles) 21:39, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite, Mark. Happy to be aboard!

As for the aesthetics, I'm sure we can figure out a format that looks good for everyone. Perhaps our initial differences are due to different browsers or screen resolutions (I'm using Firefox 1.5 on Windows @1024x768)? I'll take another look when I get back to my home computer to see how things look there in Safari. Ross 21:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

After reading extensively in the Wiki MoS (Manual of Style) and looking over several discussions (e.g. Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style--Archive_17, I think we should play with a couple of different options, test them across our host of State pages, and come to a (small) consensus on what looks best. Not only should our pages look good, but of course we should try to be compliant with convention as well. In regards to "TOCright", I feel like it works well when the TOC is very long, but not so well when it is short, because it looks out of place way over there straddling the headline. There are more options when it comes to graphics and tables, but ToCs are just inherently more restrictive under Wiki markup.

Since our goal here is uniformity, we'll just have to pick a style that looks good for 'most' of the articles (and doesn't really harm the rest), and go with it
A more extreme solution would be to turn the default TOC off and make up a new template in tabular form that's easier to control
Another effort-intensive solution would be to add a graphic box to every page to take up some of the whitescpace, but that seems like adding just for the sake of adding

How does all of this sound to you, Mark? --Ross (ElCharismo) 01:51, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm a big fan of uniformity. Yeah, let's get some consensus together. We can work it out via the Wikiproject. Problem is, some of the states' delegations are a bit… unique. And nicely so. For example, I've done a lot of work recently on U.S. Congressional Delegations from Massachusetts. I've broken the house section up by each decade because redistricting changed the size of the delegation. So I've had a little back-and-forth discussions with User:Golbez, see User_talk:markles#US Congressional tables. Just something to think about.—Mark Adler (markles) 02:59, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

After even more tweaking, I've come to realize that the element that was bothering me was the headline (literally, the line separating the intro section from the first topical section (e.g. United States Senate) ) cutting through the table of contents. For short ToCs, this does not happen, so a righthand alignment is not much of an issue. But this does occur with the really long ToCs on States like Massachusetts.

If we assume that the first principal issue here for both aesthetics and convention is controlling white space, and
The second principal issue is uniformity, then
Maybe a simple change in convention could solve both problems...

The ToC normally resides in the intro section. What if we move it to float right from the very bottom of the intro section for our State Delegation pages? Two birds with one stone? "TOCright" here? The vast majority of wasted white space arises in the intro section, and there is plenty of available real estate alongside the columnar Senate listings. Also, a ToC placed down here does nothing to the page's layout when hidden by a user (and the little box is bisected nicely by the headline). I think this might look good for all of our pages. The ToC this way resides in a place that takes advantage of the space of both sections. Take a look at Massachusetts(long): U.S._Congressional_Delegations_from_Massachusetts and New York(short): U.S._Congressional_Delegations_from_New_York. After this I'll be happy to move the discussion over to the group page. --Ross (ElCharismo) 03:13, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

OK. But just so you know… that is exactly how I'd had Massachusetts formatted before you'd edited it. See here. Anyway— I think that should be fine for the other states. Good job, Ross. —Mark Adler (markles) 03:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Haha, so it is. Well, it just goes to show - great minds think alike. Thanks for your patience, Mark. I look forward to working with you and the rest of the Project further. ~ Ross (ElCharismo) 03:32, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] COTW

How can we promote the COTW?—Markles 12:01, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vacation

Hey, I'm going to be away from my computer for 10 days (vacation). Can you get Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Congress/COTW back on its feet while I'm gone? Be bold. Maybe make it a fortnight or monthly thing. Or change number from 3 to 1. Mess around with the templates. Maybe make a "This article has been nominated as a congressional cotw" template. Again, Be Bold. I might be able to check in once or twice next week sometime. —Markles 12:00, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

- Though I have somewhat of a busy week approaching, I'll be happy to see what I can do to get the ball rolling again, and to invigorate the pulse of the project. Have a great vacation, and many happy returns! ~ Ross (ElCharismo) 15:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia_talk:Censorship

A watered-down version of the proposed policy against censorship is now open for voting. Will you kindly review the policy and make your opinions known? Thank you very much.Loom91 17:58, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] COTW Project

You voted for Fauna (animals), this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. -Scottwiki 09:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Congress style guide

I created a proposed style guide for members of Congress - User:PaulHanson/Style guide - please take a look and share your thoughts. Paul 02:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Congressional Articles for Improvement Drive

Hi, I was interested in nominating an article, but I was unsure if anyone else was still interested in the overall project so I thought I would target a few specific people and see. Are you still interested in improving articles if I can drum up some more support? TonyJoe 20:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm definitely still interested in the project. My free time has been curtailed a bit in recent weeks, but not for lack of trying. I'm perfectly willing to lend a hand. More support would definitely make such efforts easier for all of us. Kudos for soliciting interest, and please let me know what you discover/decide. ~ Ross (ElCharismo) 20:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

There are now four of us. That should be enough to get us started right? Hopefully some more of the people I've written will respond and our efforts will attract more people.TonyJoe 23:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Four will do it for now. I'm on board, and I'll contribute as best I can with the oft-limited free time at my disposal. many happy returns! ~ Ross (ElCharismo) 16:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Current mac project collaboration

The current WP:MAC collaboration is Apple II family. Please devote some time to improve this article to featured status. — Wackymacs 14:00, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of United States Representatives from Foo

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of United States Representatives from Minnesota. It is about to get deleted (any day now) and I think that would be a shame. —Markles 21:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/l/c/User_talk%7EElCharismo_f924.html"