Solar thermal...[edit | edit source]

- Hi Chris. I guess it was me who changed categories, but I only vaguely remember this. I actually agree with your naming preference; I think I was doing it in following the naming listed in the topics page (or something). I was just trying to push for consistency. And it must have been early in the process when I was still optimistic that by following the topic page, I would achieve consistency.

-

- At this point, my plan is to make another major pass through categorization, particularly topic categorization. I'll follow Lonny's preferences. Not much consensus has developed, as far as I can tell (*sigh*), but can't just let it sit, and I know Lonny prefers what he described. I really would like to see another area label (or 2 or 3). Also am somewhat unsettled as to what content belongs on the category page itself. (This last issue is potentially enough to make me wait... but I doubt it.) --CurtB 07:05, 8 January 2007 (PST)

-

-

My understanding was that:

-

  • Lonny was pretty much okay with plurals for countable nouns, but was waiting for a summary of the naming policy before giving his full support.

-

  • I was supposed to look at your proposed naming policy (User talk:Curtbeckmann/Category naming) but haven't yet. I have a partial excuse, in that I had the page as one of my Opera startup windows, to be looked at, but then had a major computer failure (HDD survived, thankfully) which distracted me... and I'm easily distracted.

-

-

I'm also wondering whether it's possible for MediaWiki to be tweaked to allow category pages to be moved, together with their history. That would be a huge improvement, especially in these early unsettled days of categorization. I suspect Lonny has already asked this question, but I'll ask him again (and Gabe) via email.

-

-

Will try and comment on User talk:Curtbeckmann/Category naming soon - feel free to prod. --Singkong2005 (now known as Chriswaterguy) · talk 20:32, 8 January 2007 (PST)

-

I'm curious what your main interest is in preserving history? Potentially, we can "move" the categories using cut/paste, but keep the old categories, potentially in a category called "Old categories" (with a notice template), plus put (in non-displayed comments) a pointer from the new category to the old category. What this would do is provide a "behind the scenes" linkage to the original history. I think that very few folks are interested in the early history, so this approach might work. A thin spot occurs when someone wants to re-use a category, but that's even workable, because the history is still there, it's just confusing. So our notice template could include the original date, or some durn thing.

-

-

Of course, this is a hell of a lot of work that wouldn't be necessary if we could move categories! But I mention this because, knowing how swamped Gabe and Lonny are, I suspect I'm going to get busy moving categories before we even get an answer. If there's a way I can do it that gives you what you are looking for, then I'll do it that way. --CurtB 21:51, 8 January 2007 (PST)

-

-

Blogs?[edit | edit source]

- Hey Chris, your user page shows the "new blog" as being the Chriswaterguy@blogspot... Also shows the Resolution blog (which I should probably drop you from just so as not to confuse visitors). Didn't notice LiveJournal there. May want an update on your page. CurtB 13:04, 15 February 2007 (PST)

-

-

Thanks! -Chriswaterguy · talk 14:31, 15 February 2007 (PST)

-

-

Testing pipes[edit | edit source]

- Does it notice this edit? --Chriswaterguy · talk 22:42, 21 February 2007 (PST)

-

Okay, now you've got me curious. What's this about? --CurtB 06:42, 22 February 2007 (PST)

-

-

Trying out Yahoo Pipes... will email shortly. --Chriswaterguy · talk 19:05, 22 February 2007 (PST)

-

-

WaterWiki[edit | edit source]

- Yes, with respect to WaterWiki we should find ways to cooperate. The great crisis regarding water is to a great extent tied to inappropriate (or non-existent) water management. Fred Bauder 06:17, 9 March 2007 (PST)