text:
Haskell/Laziness

Hard work pays off later. Laziness pays off now! – Steven Wright

Introduction
By now, you are aware that Haskell uses lazy evaluation in that nothing is evaluated until necessary. But what exactly does "until necessary" mean? In this chapter, we will see how lazy evaluation works (how little magic there is), what exactly it means for functional programming, and how to make the best use of it.

First, let's consider the reasons and implications of lazy evaluation. At first glance, we might think that lazy evaluation makes programs more efficient. After all, what can be more efficient than not doing anything? In practice, however, laziness often introduces an overhead that leads programmers to hunt for places where they can make their code more strict. The real benefit of laziness is in making the right things efficient enough. Lazy evaluation allows us to write more simple, elegant code than we could in a strict environment.

Nonstrictness versus Laziness
There is a slight difference between laziness and nonstrictness. Nonstrict semantics refers to a given property of Haskell programs that you can rely on: nothing will be evaluated until it is needed. Lazy evaluation is how you implement nonstrictness using a device called thunks which we explain in the next section. However, these two concepts are so closely linked that it helps to explain them both together. Knowledge of thunks helps in understanding nonstrictness, and the semantics of nonstrictness explains why we use lazy evaluation in the first place. So, we'll introduce the concepts simultaneously and make no particular effort to keep them from intertwining (with the exception of getting the terminology right).

Thunks and Weak head normal form
You need to understand two principles to see how programs execute in Haskell. First, we have the property of nonstrictness: we evaluate as little as possible and delay evaluation as long as possible. Second, Haskell values are highly layered; and 'evaluating' a Haskell value could mean evaluating down to any one of these layers. Let's walk through a few examples using a pair.

Assume that in the ' ' part, we use  and   somewhere — otherwise, we wouldn't need to evaluate the let-binding at all! The right-hand side could have been, and it would still work if the 'in' part doesn't mention   or. This assumption will remain for all the examples in this section.

What do we know about ? We can calculate that  must be   and   is , but remember the first principle: we don't evaluate the calls to   and   until we're forced to. So, we say that  and   are both thunks: that is, they are unevaluated values with a recipe that explains how to evaluate them. For example, for  this recipe says 'Evaluate  '. However, we are actually doing some pattern matching on the left hand side. What would happen if we removed that?

Although it's still pretty obvious to us that  is a pair, the compiler sees that we're not trying to deconstruct the value on the right-hand side of the '=' sign at all, so it doesn't really care what's there. It lets  be a thunk on its own. Later on, when we try to use, we'll probably need one or both of the components, so we'll have to evaluate  , but for now, it can be a thunk.

Above, we said Haskell values were layered. We can see that at work if we pattern match on :

After the first line has been executed,  is simply a thunk. We know nothing about the sort of value it is because we haven't been asked to find out yet. In the second line, however, we pattern match on  using a pair pattern. The compiler thinks 'I better make sure that pattern does indeed match, and in order to do that, I need to make sure   is a pair.' Be careful, though — we're not yet doing anything with the component parts (the calls to   and  ), so they can remain unevaluated. In other words,, which was just a thunk, gets evaluated to something like  , and   and   become thunks which, when evaluated, will be the component parts of the original.

Let's try a slightly more complicated pattern match:

The pattern match on the second component of  causes some evaluation. The compiler wishes to check that the  pattern matches the second component of the pair. So, it:

 * 1) Evaluates the top level of   to ensure it's a cons cell:  . (If   had been an empty list we would encounter a pattern match failure error at this point.)
 * 2) Evaluates the first thunk it just revealed to make sure it's

 * The rest of the list stays unevaluated, and  becomes a thunk which, when evaluated, will be the rest of this list.

We can 'partially evaluate' (most) Haskell values. Also, there is some sense of the minimum amount of evaluation we can do. For example, if we have a pair thunk, then the minimum amount of evaluation takes us to the pair constructor with two unevaluated components:. If we have a list, the minimum amount of evaluation takes us either to a cons cell  or an empty list. Note that in the empty list case, no more evaluation can be performed on the value; it is said to be in normal form. If we are at any of the intermediate steps so that we've performed at least some evaluation on a value, it is in weak head normal form (WHNF). (There is also a 'head normal form', but it's not used in Haskell.) Fully evaluating something in WHNF reduces it to something in normal form; if at some point we needed to, say, print  out to the user, we'd need to fully evaluate it, including those calls to   and , to  , where it is in normal form. Performing any degree of evaluation on a value is sometimes called forcing that value.

Note that for some values there is only one result. For example, you can't partially evaluate an integer. It's either a thunk or it's in normal form. Furthermore, if we have a constructor with strict components (annotated with an exclamation mark, as with ), these components become evaluated as soon as we evaluate the level above. I.e. we can never have  — as soon as we get to this level, the strictness annotation on the component of   forces us to evaluate the component part.

In this section we've explored the basics of laziness. We've seen that nothing gets evaluated until it is needed (in fact, the only place that Haskell values get evaluated is in pattern matches and inside certain primitive IO functions). This principle even applies to evaluating values — we do the minimum amount of work on a value that we need to compute our result.

Lazy and strict functions
Functions can be lazy or strict 'in an argument'. Most functions need to do something with their arguments, and this will involve evaluating these arguments to different levels. For example,  needs to evaluate only the cons cells in the argument you give it, not the contents of those cons cells. might evaluate to something like, which in turn evaluates to. Others need to evaluate their arguments fully, as in. If you had, there's no way you can do anything other than evaluate that thunk to normal form.

So, some functions evaluate their arguments more fully than others. Given two functions of one parameter,  and , we say   is stricter than   if   evaluates   to a deeper level than. Often, we only care about WHNF, so a function that evaluates its argument to at least WHNF is called strict and one that performs no evaluation is lazy. What about functions of more than one parameter? Well, we can talk about functions being strict in one parameter, but lazy in another. For example, given a function like the following:

Clearly we need to perform no evaluation on, but we need to evaluate   fully to normal form, so   is strict in its first parameter but lazy in its second.

In the original discussion about Folds, we discussed memory problems with  that are solved by the strictly-evaluated. Essentially,  and   both evaluate their arguments to the same level of strictness, but   can start producing values straight away, whereas   needs to evaluate cons cells all the way to the end before it starts producing any output. So, there are times when strictness can be valuable.

Black-box strictness analysis

Imagine we're given some function  which takes a single parameter. We're not allowed to look at its source code, but we want to know whether  is strict or not. How might we do this? Probably the easiest way is to use the standard Prelude value. Forcing  to any level of evaluation will halt our program and print an error, so all of these print errors:

So if a function is strict, passing it  will result in an error. Were the function lazy, passing it undefined would print no error and we can carry on as normal. For example, none of the following produce errors:

So we can say that  is a strict function if, and only if,   results in an error being printed and the halting of our program.

In the context of nonstrict semantics
What we've presented so far makes sense until you start to think about functions like. Is  strict? Our gut reaction is probably to say "No! It doesn't evaluate its argument, therefore it's lazy". However, let's apply our black-box strictness analysis from the last section to. Clearly,  is going to print an error and halt our program, so shouldn't we say that   is strict? The reason for this mixup is that Haskell's nonstrict semantics makes the whole issue a bit murkier.

Nothing gets evaluated if it doesn't need to be, according to nonstrictness. In the following code, will  be evaluated?

If you type this into GHCi, it seems strict — you'll get an error. However, our question was something of a trick. It doesn't make sense to state whether a value gets evaluated unless we're doing something to this value. Think about it: if we type in  into GHCi, the only reason we have to do any evaluation whatsoever is because GHCi has to print us out the result. Typing  again requires GHCi to print that list back to us, so it must evaluate it to normal form. In your average Haskell program, nothing at all will be evaluated until we come to perform the IO in. So it makes no sense to say whether something is evaluated or not unless we know what it's being passed to, one level up. One lesson here is: don't blindly trust GHCi because everything in GHCi is filtered through IO!

So when we say "Does  force  ?" what we really mean is "Given that we're forcing, does   get forced as a result?". Now we can turn our attention back to. If we force  to normal form, then   will be forced to normal form, so we conclude that   is strict. itself doesn't evaluate its argument, it just hands it on to the caller who will. One way to see this is in the following code:

doesn't "stop" the forcing, so it is strict. Contrast this to a clearly lazy function, :

The denotational view on things
If you're familiar with denotational semantics (perhaps you've read the wikibook chapter?), then the strictness of a function can be summed up very succinctly:

f ⊥ = ⊥ ⇔ f is strict

Assuming that, we can say that everything with type, including  ,  ,   and so on, has denotation ⊥.

Lazy pattern matching
You might have seen pattern matches like the following in Haskell sources.

The question is: what does the tilde sign (~) mean in the above pattern match? ~ makes a lazy pattern or irrefutable pattern. Normally, if you pattern match using a constructor as part of the pattern, you have to evaluate any argument passed into that function to make sure it matches the pattern. For example, if you had a function like the above, the third argument would be evaluated when you call the function to make sure the value matches the pattern. (Note that the first and second arguments won't be evaluated, because the patterns  and   match anything. Also it's worth noting that the components of the tuple won't be evaluated: just the 'top level'. Try   to see this.)

However, prepending a pattern with a tilde sign delays the evaluation of the value until the component parts are actually used. But you run the risk that the value might not match the pattern — you're telling the compiler 'Trust me, I know it'll work out'. (If it turns out it doesn't match the pattern, you get a runtime error.) To illustrate the difference:

Prelude> let f (x,y) = 1 Prelude> f undefined
 * Exception: Prelude.undefined

Prelude> let f ~(x,y) = 1 Prelude> f undefined 1

In the first example, the value is evaluated because it has to match the tuple pattern. You evaluate undefined and get undefined, which stops the proceedings. In the latter example, you don't bother evaluating the parameter until it's needed, which turns out to be never, so it doesn't matter you passed it. To bring the discussion around in a circle back to :

Prelude> (const 1 *** const 2) undefined (1,2)

If the pattern weren't irrefutable, the example would have failed.

When does it make sense to use lazy patterns?
Essentially, use lazy patterns when you only have the single constructor for the type, e.g. tuples. Multiple equations won't work nicely with irrefutable patterns. To see this, let's examine what would happen were we to make  have an irrefutable pattern:

head' :: [a] -> a head' ~[]    = undefined head' ~(x:xs) = x

We're using one of these patterns for sure, and we need not evaluate even the top level of the argument until absolutely necessary, so we don't know whether it's an empty list or a cons cell. As we're using an irrefutable pattern for the first equation, this will match, and the function will always return undefined.

Benefits of nonstrict semantics
Why make Haskell a nonstrict language in the first place? What advantages are there?

Separation of concerns without time penalty
Lazy evaluation encourages a kind of "what you see is what you get" mentality when it comes to coding. For example, let's say you wanted to find the lowest three numbers in a long list. In Haskell this is achieved extremely naturally:. However a naïve translation of that code in a strict language would be a very bad idea! It would involve computing the entire sorted list, then chopping off all but the first three elements. However, with lazy evaluation we stop once we've sorted the list up to the third element, so this natural definition turns out to be efficient (depending on the implementation of sort).

To give a second example, the function  from Data.List allows you to see if one string is a substring of another string. It's easily definable as:

Again, this would be suicide in a strict language as computing all the tails of a list would be very time-consuming. However, here we only evaluate enough elements of each tail to determine whether it has prefix  or not, and stop and return   once we found one with prefix.

There are many more examples along these lines. So we can write code that looks and feels natural and doesn't incur any time penalty.

However, as always in Computer Science (and in life), a tradeoff exists (in particular, a space-time tradeoff). Using a thunk instead of a plain  for a trivial calculation (like  ) can be a waste. For more examples, see the page on ../Strictness.

Improved code reuse
Often code reuse is desireable.

For example, we'll take again (but in more detail)  from Data.List. Let's look at the full definition:

Where,   and   are the functions taken from the   library. This function determines if its first parameter,  occurs as a subsequence of its second,  ; when applied on  's (i.e.  ), it checks if   is a substring of. Read in a strict way, it forms the list of all the tails of, then checks them all to see if any of them have   as a prefix. In a strict language, writing this function this way (relying on the already-written programs,  , and  ) would be silly, because it would be far slower than it needed to be. You'd end up doing direct recursion again, or in an imperative language, a couple of nested loops. You might be able to get some use out of, but you certainly wouldn't use. You might be able to write a usable shortcutting, but it would be more work, since you wouldn't want to use   to do it.

Now, in a lazy language, all the shortcutting is done for you. You don't end up rewriting  to shortcut when you find a solution or rewriting the recursion done in tails so that it will stop early again. You can reuse standard library code better. Laziness isn't just a constant-factor speed thing, it makes a qualitative impact on the code which is reasonable to write. In fact, it's commonplace to define infinite structures, and then only use as much as is needed, rather than having to mix up the logic of constructing the data structure with code that determines whether any part is needed. Code modularity is increased, as laziness gives you more ways to chop up your code into small pieces, each of which does a simple task of generating, filtering, or otherwise manipulating data.

Why Functional Programming Matters largely focuses on examples where laziness is crucial and provides a strong argument for lazy evaluation being the default.

Infinite data structures
 Examples:

''Infinite data structures usually tie a knot, too, but the Sci-Fi-Explanation of that is better left to the next section. One could move the next section before this one but I think that infinite data structures are simpler than tying general knots''

Tying the knot
More practical examples?

''Sci-Fi-Explanation: "You can borrow things from the future as long as you don't try to change them". Advanced: the "Blueprint"-technique. Examples: the one from the haskellwiki, the one from the mailing list.''

At first a pure functional language seems to have a problem with circular data structures. Suppose I have a data type like this:

If I want to create two objects "x" and "y" where "x" contains a reference to "y" and "y" contains a reference to "x" then in a conventional language this is straightforward: create the objects and then set the relevant fields to point to each other:

-- Not Haskell code x := new Foo; y := new Foo; x.value := 1; x.next := y; y.value := 2 y.next := x;

In Haskell this kind of modification is not allowed. So instead we depend on lazy evaluation:

This depends on the fact that the "Foo" constructor is a function, and like most functions it gets evaluated lazily. Only when one of the fields is required does it get evaluated.

It may help to understand what happens behind the scenes here. When a lazy value is created (for example, by a call to "Foo"), the compiler generates an internal data structure called a "thunk" containing the function call and arguments. When the value of the function is demanded, the function is called (as you would expect). But then the thunk data structure is replaced with the return value. Thus, anything else that refers to that value gets it straight away without the need to call the function.

(Note that the Haskell language standard makes no mention of thunks: they are an implementation mechanism. From the mathematical point of view this is a straightforward example of mutual recursion.)

So, when we call "circularFoo" the result "x" is actually a thunk. One of the arguments is a reference to a second thunk representing "y". This in turn has a reference back to the thunk representing "x". If we then use the value "next x" this forces the "x" thunk to be evaluated and returns a reference to the "y" thunk. If I use the value "next $ next x" then I force the evaluation of both thunks. So now both thunks have been replaced with the actual "Foo" structures, referring to each other. Which is what we wanted.

This is most often applied with constructor functions, but it isn't limited just to constructors. You can just as readily write:

The same logic applies.

Memoization, Sharing and Dynamic Programming
''Dynamic programming with immutable arrays. DP with other finite maps, Hinze's paper "Trouble shared is Trouble halved". Let-floating .''

Conclusions about laziness
Laziness:

 * Can make qualitative improvements to performance!
 * Can hurt performance in some other cases.
 * Makes code simpler.
 * Makes hard problems conceivable.
 * Allows for separation of concerns with regard to generating and processing data.

title: Haskell/Laziness


text:
User talk:193.2.155.160

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikibooks. Wikibooks is intended to be read without the need for external reference and requires content rather than external links particularly those which are for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links may include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikibooks. Thank you. -- Herby talk thyme 11:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:193.2.155.160


text:
Career Handbook

The idea of a Creative Commons Career Handbook was born while working in a Career Center in a European university. The general problem with universities in Europe is that resources are too limited to create valuable resources for students and others. The vision I have with this handbook is that it will evolve in a reference for students, but also for more experienced professionals who need to write cover letters and update their CVs.

= Skills = Career_Handbook/Skills

Networking
= Application process = Career_Handbook/Application_process

Reading job advertisements
= Application tools = Career_Handbook/Application_tools

Curriculum Vitae
In most European countries a Curriculum Vitae is used instead of a [resume], which is more common in North America.

Structure of a CV Resume Header Goals and Objective Resume Header
 * Name (including gender, age, and nationality)
 * Address (including phone and email)

Resume Body-- Resume Body--
 * Details of Work experience
 * Education
 * Skills possessed
 * Brief Description of Work Experience
 * Significant Achievements

Resume Footer Resume Footer
 * Other experience
 * Personnel Details (Languages know,DOB,)
 * Hobbies

How to use action verbs
Action verbs can be used to stress the skills you possess and want to bring to the attention of the recruiter. Action verbs can best be used at the beginning of a sentence, since they get the most attention at that place.

How to build a good CV-sentence?

= Appendix = Career_Handbook/Appendix

Action verbs
Action verbs can be used in [CVs], [resumes] and [letters]. On this page you find a list of action verbs organized by the type of skill that the action verb signals.

Administrative skills
 * approved
 * arranged
 * catalogued

Communication skills
 * addressed
 * advertised
 * edited

title: Career Handbook


text:
User talk:Doncqueurs~enwikibooks

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page.

Good luck! -- Herby talk thyme 12:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

And
Before going to much further could you take a look at the help stuff above and particularly naming policy. If you start a "book" called Career Handbook for example then subpages must be named in accordance with policy which would mean Networking should actually be named Career Handbook/Networking and be back linked for ease of navigation. Thanks & regards -- Herby talk thyme 12:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * And apologies - didn't see it was not yours - however as it looks abandoned feel free to take it over? -- Herby talk thyme 12:17, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Doncqueurs. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Doncqueurs~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:06, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 04:54, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Doncqueurs~enwikibooks


text:
User talk:Gichiro

Image copyright problem with Image:Picture 25394405yy.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Picture 25394405yy.JPG. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikibooks because of copyright law (see Wikibooks' Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikibooks are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information or giving false information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Study help desk. Thank you. -- Herby talk thyme 12:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gichiro


text:
Template:Qr-twwp

 * This adds page to Category:Queried pages.

title: Template:Qr-twwp


text:
Artificial Intelligence/Logic/Representation/Propositional calculus

One of the points of logic is that you can reason about statements even when you don't know what those statements mean. We can replace statements, or "propositions," with variable names.

So, for example, you can say "It's raining and I'm wet," which is a representation as characters describing an utterance in natural language. In logic, we might represent this like so:

$$(a \wedge b)$$

In this case the proposition "It's raining" is represented by "a" and "I'm wet" is represented by b. The $$\wedge$$ symbol stands for "and."

Let's talk a bit about propositions. Propositions are statements that can be either true or false, and nothing else. This is called "the law of excluded middle," because there's nothing allowed in the middle of true and false. The law helps us know what kinds of utterances are candidates for propositions and which are not. For example, questions (e.g., What color is he wearing?), exclamations (e.g., Wow!), and commands (e.g., Study harder.) are not propositions.

The propositional calculus is defined in the context of Boolean constants, where two or more values are computed against each other to produce an accurate description of a concept. Each variable used in the calculus holds a value for it, which is either true to the context or false1.

Propositional logic deals with the determination of the truth of a sentence. An allowable sentence is called the syntax of proposition. A syntax or sentence holds various propositional symbols, where each symbol holds a proposition that can either be  or. The names of the symbols can be anything from alphabets like,   or   to symbols like $$\alpha$$, $$\beta$$ or $$\gamma$$ to variable names like  , and may hold meaning relative to their contexts in the concept. Although, two propositions are constant as per the syntax and have a fixed meaning. They are:
 * - proposition that is always-true.
 * - proposition that is always-false2.

In mathematical terms, these values would pronounce more like this:

$$u \Leftarrow a \wedge b \wedge c$$

In simple terms this means that an object is an instance of a concept  if the conditions ,   and   hold true simultaneously. So, for instance, we are given with a concept that says, one is eligible to drive a car if one has a license, a car and a knowledge of driving. To state this in propositional calculus, you'd have to state this in the following mathematical notation:

$$CanDriveCar \Leftarrow HasLicense \wedge HasCar \wedge KnowsHowToDrive $$

However simple to denote, the zero-order logic is only capable of describing concepts in a limited context and do not hold much of a descriptive power.


text:
User:AndrewUK86

Hi all. I'm a Londoner hoping to make Wikipedia and Wikibooks better.

title: User:AndrewUK86


text:
User talk:AndrewUK86

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page.

Good luck! -- Herby talk thyme 14:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:AndrewUK86


text:
User talk:Delano~enwikibooks

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page.

Good luck! -- Herby talk thyme 14:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Do you like Ido at all Delano? Phil.andy.graves 10:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Can you work on the Afrikaans wikibook some more plz? Icelandic Hurricane 22:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * thnks. Now what? I think the fact that there is a song in Afrikaans by a well known band (Seether) should be mentioned somewhere. Icelandic Hurricane 23:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Delano. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Delano~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 04:52, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Delano~enwikibooks


text:
Horticulture/Lepidopteran Pests

The order Lepidoptera is the second largest order of insects and includes the butterflies, skippers, and moths. Members of the order are referred to as lepidopterans, and a person who collects or studies this order is referred to as a Lepidopterist. The order has more than 180,000 species in 127 families and 46 superfamilies. It is second only to Coleoptera (the beetles) in the number of described species. The word "lepidoptera" means "scaly-wing", from the ancient Greek words lepidos and pteron.

Description
Lepidopterans undergo complete metamorphosis going through a four-stage life cycle of egg - larva / caterpillar - pupa/chrysalis -imago/adult. The larvae have a toughened (sclerotized) head capsule, chewing mouthparts, and a soft body, that may have hair-like or other projections, 3 pairs of true legs, and additional prolegs (up to 5 pairs). They can be confused with the larvae of sawflies. Lepidopteran larvae can be differentiated by the presence of crochets on the prolegs which are absent in the Symphyta (sawflies). Most caterpillars are herbivores, but a few are carnivores (some eat ants or other caterpillars) and detritivores (Dugdale, 1996).

Adults have two pairs of membranous wings covered, usually completely, by minute scales. In some species, wings are reduced or absent (often in the female but not the male). Antennae are prominent. In moths, males frequently have more feathery antennae than females, for detecting the female pheromones at a distance. Adult mouth parts, called a proboscis, are adapted for sucking nectar. Some species have reduced mouthparts (some species do not feed as adults), and others have them modified to pierce and suck blood or fruit juices (some Noctuids) (Scoble, 1992).

Families of Lepidoptera
There are about 130 families in this order with variations depending on the taxonomic treatment (see the family template box at the bottom of this section).

The Lepidoptera are divided into several suborders, the largest being ../Ditrysia/.

Several other classifications of lepidopteran families are used in older literature. These include the ../Rhopalocera/ (club-horned) consisting of what are commonly called butterflies and the ../Heterocera/ (varied-horned) consisting of the moths. These categories are however, not valid taxonomic groups.

Another non-standard classification separates the Lepidoptera into ../Microlepidoptera/ for the smaller species (mostly moths) and ../Macrolepidoptera/ for the larger species.

Butterflies Moths
 * Hesperioidea
 * Papilionoidea
 * Acanthopteroctetoidea
 * Alucitoidea
 * Axioidea
 * Bombycoidea
 * Calliduloidea
 * Choreutoidea
 * Cossoidea
 * Drepanoidea
 * Epermenioidea
 * Eriocranioidea
 * Galacticoidea
 * Gelechioidea
 * Geometroidea
 * Gracillarioidea
 * Hedyloidea
 * Hepialoidea
 * Heterobathmioidea
 * Hyblaeoidea
 * Immoidea
 * Incurvarioidea
 * Lasiocampoidea
 * Lophocoronoidea
 * Micropterigoidea
 * Mimallonoidea
 * Mnesarchaeoidea
 * Neopseustoidea
 * Nepticuloidea
 * Noctuoidea
 * Palaephatoidea
 * Pterophoroidea
 * Pyraloidea
 * Schreckensteinioidea
 * Sesioidea
 * Simaethistoidea
 * Thyridoidea
 * Tineoidea
 * Tischerioidea
 * Tortricoidea
 * Urodoidea
 * Whalleyanoidea
 * Yponomeutoidea
 * Zygaenoidea

title: Horticulture/Lepidopteran Pests


text:
Talk:Horticulture/Lepidopteran Pests

This page has been blanked because it contained a very large number of "false links" since it was originally a wikipedia talk page. The information was not particularly useful for this book, but is available in the history if anyone wants to look.-- SB_Johnny | talk 01:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Horticulture/Lepidopteran Pests


text:
User talk:Herbythyme/Compost1

'''This is my talk page archive - don't edit it. New messages on my talk page, thanks'''

Come introduce yourself at the new users page. If you have any questions, you can ask there or contact me personally. Kellen T 14:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Please also check out the Cookbook policy page and the Cookbook talk pages.

Alphabetizing
Hi, actually I think that putting into every category listing is a bit of a bad idea for somebody to be doing manually. We should either (a) have somebody with a bot automatically put PAGENAME in everywhere (b) get this enhancement (which I've described here) implemented such that we don't have to engage in such silliness in the future. Kellen T 19:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Is there a way of getting the necessary Cookbook: prefix into links (far more tedious than correctly arraging cats in my mind!)?
 * If you mean while wikifying ingredients, etc, then no there isn't an easy way right now. It's probably possible to hack the editing buttons to put "Cookbook:" in for each internal link automagically, but I've not looked at that code before. Perhaps I'll give it a go. Kellen T 16:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * It's no bother at all. I'm glad to see some new and active contributors to the cookbook. Kellen T 07:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Oops! Another note on alphabetizing. It's worse to put in than  since then all pages you've aliased as "R" are then equal and I'm not sure that the sorting will fall back on correct alphabetizing -- that is; you'll get everything under "R", but inside of the R section, it's not sure that the recipes will be sorted correctly. Kellen T 15:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, you can use if you really really want to alphabetize things. As I said before, though, it's probably a bit of wasted effort doing this by hand. Kellen T 19:21, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, either use or  . Both will have the same result for 99% of the cookbook pages. Both of these are better than writing in the recipe title by hand since they are updated by the wiki software so if the recipe moves it'll be correctly sorted automagically. Kellen T 20:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Herbthyme... The best way to get the pages to come up nice in the categories is usually to use the subpage name, rather than the full pagename (full pagename would be "Coobook:Recipe X", which would render under "C". The best way is to just copy the text after "Cookbook:", and make your category ((Category:Categoryname|Recipe X)) (replace the "(" with "[" of course). I noticed that you had put "English somethingorother paté" under P (presumable for Paté... usually better to just use the whole recipe name. (Though as things grow, there might also be a category for vegan patés, etc.).

BTW: there's a rapidly growing list of new recipes that need cleanup on the Transwiki log... a lot more coming, especially Indian recipes. For the dewikifying part of it, see Dewikify for pointers.-- SB_Johnny | talk 17:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Actually since the "Cookbook:" part is a namespace, renders as "Recipe name" for the page "Cookbook:Recipe name". Kellen T 19:21, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Ah, nifty :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 20:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

SuiSui
SuiSui is a steward, essentially an admin on all wikimedia projects but not listed on the local administrators list. I'm guessing that his attention was called by someone on the IRC channels (probably #wikimedia-tech), because people were pinging for me around that time to alert me to it.

Unfortunately we don't have many active admins right now, so there's an occaisional gap. I'm usually on between 4 and 6 Eastern time, but wasn't this morning. If you have acess to IRC, there's usually people on at #wikiversity-en (freenode) that will be able to help you (that's what happened this time, I'm pretty sure). Gentgeen, CraigSpurrier, Derbeth, Whiteknight, and myself are often found on #en-wikibooks as well, but more often just logging, so you should send a query to any admin that shows on the member list. -- SB_Johnny | talk 21:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * IRC is certainly not a requirement... just a good way to get in touch with people in "real time". Just out of curiosity: where are you? I notice you're often around at odd parts of the day (if your "day" happens to be in the eastern US).

 * Also, I saw your userpage on wikipedia... are you a gardener? -- SB_Johnny | talk 10:33, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Animal_Care/Land_hermit_crab
Thanks for the compliment and the suggestion! There are now links from the shell lists back to the care info. Jangim 09:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Garden book
Yeah, the main page isn't much yet... problem is that I've mostly been working on weed profiles, which might not be as interesting to other people. I'm going to redo the index this weekend (I do it once a month), so if you think you can find a way to organise the stuff better on the main page, you'll have more to work with. -- SB_Johnny | talk 11:08, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Hi Herby. Yeah, the Gardening book is actually just a transcription of an old public domain book which was supposed to be moved to wikisource. Most of the stuff in there is horribly out of date, but an interesting read nonetheless. I think there are some categories available, but I haven't put everything in them yet... the problem with being an admin is that it gets in the way of working on your own stuff :-(.

 * There's a template somewhere for veggie profiles, but it's a lot older, and I think I want to update it to match up with the weed profiles. The veggie pages need to be from scratch though... the wikipedia pages on these have 500+ revisions because of vandalism (it's amazing how many peope think it's funny to point out inappropriately erotic uses for cucumbers, etc.).

 * I'm going to be planting winter greens today, so I'll think about the chapters on them as I'm doing that (lettuce, pac choi, and spinach). Your wp page also reminded me of some recipes I've come up with for pineapple sage... might work on that too :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 12:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Metric Measurements
Hi, you asked me to place || to the pages that I'm updating on cookbook. What exactly do I do and what does this do? Also, is it OK to mark all modifications to measurements as minor mods? Xania 14:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

could you give me a hand with this?
I've been trying to get Wikibooks for Wikipedians up and ready for "the presses"... since you're also a cross-project writer, I was wondering if you might have some input. -- SB_Johnny | talk 14:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Working on a Saturday??? Bummer! :-)
 * I moved your question to the Staff Lounge... we're not pooulated enough to have multiple policy debate pages.-- SB_Johnny | talk 15:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Adventist Pages
Thanks for doing the reverts on the Adventist pages. I have no idea who this person is, and I don't think he (or she) has a valid reason for making the changes. I do keep a pretty good eye on these pages - and usually when others jump in they make positive contributions. But these weren't what I would call "improvements" (but perhaps misguided rather than malicious). Thanks again. Jim Thomas 14:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

And... thanks again! Jim Thomas 14:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Nomination
Hi Herby,

I just nominated you for adminship... please accept or decline on WB:RFA.

Assuming your nomination goes through, I'll be happy to walk you through the tools and how they work. -- SB_Johnny | talk 15:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Bots
If a bot does the editing, you'll be able to select "hide bot edits" on the RC page. -- SB_Johnny | talk 17:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that :)
Keep in mind that I'm pretty much the only admin that bothers going through speedy deletes. I get to them eventually, but I like doing other things too (just for variety). :-)

We desparately need more admins... when I was sysopped, the first thing I did was empty out the speedy deletion category, because there were things on that list that I myself had marked months before! I don't mind doing 10 or 20 admin actions per day, but more than that and it feels like drudgery, rather than fun. Maybe I should ask for tips, eh? ;) -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:39, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Yeah, I know. Why do you think I want you sysopped? I'm switching my vote on darklama, actually... if you want to see a really active admin, vote for him: he's itching to clear that category too :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

 * BTW: have you seen w:WP:PANDA? Seems like the sort of thing you might enjoy :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 14:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Inactive Admins
It was a matter of judgment on KelvSYC that I guess went with activity. I don't explicitly remember each admin's contributions at the time, but when I created the list on October 1 his year of inactivity was barely there and I must have thought it to be too close. In Daniel Mayer's case, he's a big-time user across the Wikimedia project. Maveric149 and Daniel Mayer are the same person and we de-sysopped the active user Maveric149 but not Daniel Mayer because I believe that is his currently-used alias now. He's a Steward I'm pretty sure which means he can re-create himself as an admin whenever he wants. I avoided him just like I would Jimbo Wales. On the next round we can give it a try to see what the de-sysopping Steward says. -within focus 19:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Non-Wikipedia wikis often have a problem with users becoming inactive and no one noticing. Our policy apparently has support in other forms like you just linked to me on Meta, but unfortunately Wikipedia editors come over here and get sore over our policy. -within focus 19:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Remote Viewing/Pr02
I was the person who deleted it before. However I was told I should turn it into a WB:VFD request this time around, so you may wish to cast your vote and state your opinion there. --darklama 12:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Edits on VfD
Thanks for reverting those edits on WB:VFD. They weren't actually by me, but they were from my bot. I have sent out a few copies of the source code to people to look it over, and perhaps some of them experimented with it? I'll keep a close eye out for changes like that, I probably should have removed my signature from the bot code before I emailed it out to people...--Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 16:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

vandalism of creative writing/fiction technique
Thanks for vandalizing the character section. Herbie has vandalized the format of that page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.190.91.10 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 6 Nov 2006 (UTC) and another piece added by —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.192.62.132 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 26 Nov 2006  (UTC)

Proofread/opinions please
Spent the morning making templates for and then writing a couple chapters on garden pests. Please have a look and see if it needs tweaking!

-- SB_Johnny | talk 16:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * A Wikimanual of Gardening/Slugs
 * A Wikimanual of Gardening/Pine Sawflies

 * Honestly I'm more into making the content than the table of contents... you're welcome to make one though :). Off to import pages that should be linked from the slug page (diotomaceous earth, snails, etc.). -- SB_Johnny | talk 16:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

A-level Chemistry/AQA/Module 1/Atomic Structure
Thank you very much for tidying up that unfinished word; I was caught mid-edit and had to log off quickly. :) niallj 17:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Help Pages
Would you be interested in helping to fix up the help pages? Specifically pages dealing with how to use the wiki software in general. There's missing contents, duplicate contents, broken links, etc. General disorganization basically. --darklama 19:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

 * If you look through the link in the title you should easly find them. One example from a link on the help page link: Help:Contents/Editing_Wikibooks_-_the_basics. Some pages probably should be moved to reflect good naming conventions too. --darklama 20:00, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't think there's any current preference. The help pages I think have been pretty much abandond except by vandals. A lot of help pages were deleted that I think were copied from Meta and someone else at some point tried to adopt help from WP. I don't know the reason for the deletions, perhaps they were just hopelessly outdated and nobody was keeping them up. My preference is to try to create our own help and to turn it into a wikibook in the Help namespace, so as to give a good example of what a wikibook is. I don't think its a good idea to use or link to WP help because there may be WP specific policies and guidelines intertwined in the text that doesn't apply here that would need changing to adopt to what does apply here. I've read Meta help a lot though and I can say it sticks to just how to do things, so is probably the better choice if you wish to interlink. The interlink shortcut for Meta is m: . BTW using the transwiki process by requesting an import or copying the edit history for help pages is unnecessary according to SB_Johnny (I went down that path because I thought stuff like that was necessary to conferm to GFDL). He also happens to be the person I talked a little bit to about the state of the help pages and who suggested you might be interested. Contributing to Help pages should be a low impact decision provided we stay clear of mentioning policies and guidelines, which I think we should do anyways to reduce how often the help pages would need to be updated. However there are help pages that try to complement policies and guidelines in the Wikibooks namespace, those we should avoid touching for now. For example Help:Transwiki. And yes it is a project. --darklama 14:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

 * The way I think we can best look at it if you will is as if the help namespace is a single book. So that it is Help:Chapter/subchapter. That way individual pages as they are now might be kept without having to move them around much. I think we should not try to figure out what was intented as that too may be outdated and try to fix the help to be as general as possible in a NPOV fashion. For example when describing what the edit summer is used for explain it in the general since without explaining POV of how you think it ought to be used, since there isn't a policy requiring it be used a certain way. Links in the help namespace that point to policies on WP I think should be deleted, so people don't think those policies apply here too. I would define help mostly consisting of "What is a wiki and how do I use it" for new users to Wikibooks, which I think can be done without POV getting in the way. Think of it as another wikibook that teaches readers the basics of using a wiki. I totally agree with the observation that it looks promising until you get into them. I feel as though fixing the help pages may help some new users understand Wikibooks better and possibly reduce the number of users who take one look and go elsewhere or users who may be trying to help, but may get mistaken as vandals due to lack of clarity of the help. --darklama 15:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't talking about removing all WP links everywhere on Wikibooks. Just ones mostly in the Help namespace, except maybe as a see also or ones on help pages that complement Wikibooks policy pages. I'm trying to avoid touching the help pages that complement the policy pages because they are somewhat a different type of help and probably more established and up to date then anything else, and don't want to risk touching on anything that might be considered "high impact". I think the first page users see in the help page is mostly defined and we should try to work twords having contents organized that way if possible. The only change I think ought to be is make editing wikibooks basics and editing wikibooks one chapter, but other then that stick to something along those lines. I agree Help:Editing can be scary. I don't have any exact ideas of how it should be improved, so feel free to be creative. My only thoughts are they really should look more like a book rather then how it does now. It doesn't even use a table of contents to allow users to navigate to just the information they're interested in nor does the whole box around the text thing look nice IMO. One thought I had, was to have a table summerizing the different markups thats more compact (as in all on one page) with "learn more..." links to individual pages that deals with a specific form of wiki markup in more detail, but that might be still scary. --darklama 16:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Ya Help is a namespace rather then the name of a book. Sorry for the confusion. I was just suggesting we treat it as one giant book. --darklama 18:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: my monobook.js
Sure, just add ↓ to your monobook.js. If you have any questions on how something works feel free to ask me. //Modified .js from en.wikipedia. Combines User:Lupin's popups and Anti-vandal tool with User:Voice of All's .js. document.write(''); /* (Broken up so that page preview doesn't get confused) */ --Az1568 02:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome! And thanks for taking a look at my .js (btw nav popups are included with it, but are hidden in the script's Rollback.js.) --Az1568 09:04, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

 * US UTC-8 See UTC-8 or The current UTC-8 time.--Az1568 09:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Spell checking's ok but it gets boring around the 20th check.--Az1568 20:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Gardening: book
Hey, thanks for the heads up.

The Gardening book is actually deprecated... most of the pages belong on wikisource, as they're just a transcription of a very old public domain book. I actually want to make that page into something of a bookshelf page, with links to the current garden book, future garden books (the wikimanual might need splitting up after a time), books about botany, building sheds and patios, etc. I'll leave him a note on his talk about it... hopefully he sticks around because he's a very thorough contributor.

I also wanted to ask your opinion about something: I'd like to see chapters on gardening "products", especially the organic pesticides and herbicides. I don't use these, because I use commercial formulations and tank-mix them myself (not recommended for "civilians"). I'm thinking about getting in touch with the sellers/manufacturers of the non-professional products and asking them to do some writeups... what do you think the best way of going about that would be? -- SB_Johnny | talk 12:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Yeah, I've been busy, and will be for a while... for the first time in a few years I have no employees to help me out, so I'm on the "wake up, work, sleep" schedule.

 * I'd love to get local organic organisations involved. If you're on any web forums and such, please feel free to advertise for contributors :).

 * I think it would be great if every single garden product sold anywhere in the world were discussed in the manual. It's not paper, so it's not like the book will get too heavy to carry around, and if, say, all the things in the garden shops in your town had pages, a print version for gardening in your town could be put together :). Actually, I think it would be good if your local garden shop had a printout behind the counter, to help answer questions about the products they sell. That's part of the beauty of the GFDL, because it can just as easily be used for personal research as it can for consumer education and customer service. -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Dammit. All the stuff in the tomato page, top to bottom, is copyvio. Really frustrating :(. -- SB_Johnny | talk 16:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Protecting Pokemon
One of the reasons I prefer Wikibooks to other wikis is the fact that an anonymous user can contribute. I'll protect it if it becomes necessary. Also, vandals vandalize. Even if the page is protected, they'll vandalize somewhere else. Somewhere that isn't on my watchlist. So it would be a bit easier to just leave the page as is. Easier to do just a quickie ban + revert than all that. Plus, I don't feel like protecting pages is a good idea. Maybe some anonymous user will make an annotated guide to Pokemon anime or manga in the future, which is technically acceptable here. --Dragontamer 15:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Welcome!
Thanks for the Welcome! Sugarpine 16:56, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

O.K. Sugarpine 16:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

A few questions
Hey Herby, thanks for the welcome. I do have some questions, if I could take a bit of your time. I've been doing some work in the organic chemistry textbook and I'll probably do quite a bit more over the next few months, if I have the time.

There are a few areas that need fairly major surgery. There's duplication of content, some of it conflicting. There are things that appear to be in the wrong sections. I've moved a few links around, but there are a few pages that should be moved around. Should I go ahead and do that? And as for moving pages, when they get moved, do links to them get updated? I've never done that before, and just don't want to have to go breaking a lot of links.

It doesn't appear that there's been much work on the book in the past year or so. Do you know if anyone else is putting any time into it? I'd rather coordinate with anyone who's actively involved than make assumptions about their intentions. I may not be seeing something they're trying to do in some of these cases. Pete 15:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!!!!!!!
Thanks for the help on those volcano pages. Also, thanks for the praise on my work. You are one of the only people that has said I've worked alot on here. Tannersf 19:25 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Lol, thanks but...
I found your edit while searching recent changes :-) I was actually interested in reading some Philippine history. Kinda lucky I deleted it when you tagged it. :-) --Dragontamer 19:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply
I got your email. I don't mind getting email, in fact i enjoy having something worthwhile in my mailbox to read (as opposed to "Natural male enhancement" advertisements). For future reference though, if you include the word "wikibooks" in your subject, the email will bypass my spam filter, and go into a special folder.

I do agree with you that we need to drum up support among the people that we do have, but I also think that it wouldn't be too hard for us to attract some people from wikipedia either. Plenty of people, i'm sure, wouldn't mind leaving the hustle and bustle of wikipedia for our little project.

I also agree that we should call together all our active contributors, and try to get them more involved in our project. There are plenty of active people who, i'm sure, would become more involved if they knew there was more on our server then just the one book they are working on.

I think we could draft a new page, such as Staff, or something, and an associated talkpage where people could chat with one-another. Please let me know if you have any other ideas. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 23:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

forum.php.blah
Yup, protected. You can tell if one is protected because you'll see "view source" where the "edit" button should be at the top. -- SB_Johnny | talk 09:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Huh... musta missed it :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 09:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

 * lol... wrong button, twice :). Off to make coffee (it's 5 AM here). -- SB_Johnny | talk 09:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Handbook
Yeah, I'm trying to make an easy guidebook for the tools, both for the sake of new administrators and to help "demystify" administratorship. If you want to help, you could link in the policy pages from the various projects... best way to find them is to change your search preferences on each project to include the project namespace (e.g., "Wikibooks" on Wikibooks, "Wikipedia" on Wikipedia, etc.). I'm guessing wikipedia will have a billion subpolicies for each tool, but it's better to have them in one place, followed up by annotation to get the gist of them all without having to read an encyclopedia's worth of guidelines and policies :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 12:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

 * We don't have any local policy on block duration as far as I know, but I believe wikipedia does. (You know that the handbook is for all wikimedia projects, right?) -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I doubt it will bring many... wikipedians tend to think of wikibooks like New Yorkers would see a small town in Iowa: yeah, it's there, but not worth going to :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 16:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

 * "what I don't understand is why you are so keen to play with them!" -- My problem is that no mater how much I might dislike how things are done on wikipedia, the fact is that I really love wikipedia. The sorts of things that I prefer to write about are for the most part things that belong on wikibooks, and while I've come to see wikipedia as just one project among many equally worthy projects, I still have enormous respect for it. And as much as you might be fond of the fact that "pure spam" articles on wikipedia are now "csd11", careful research (very careful, because most of the "evidence" was deleted) will show you that the original ((db-spam)) template was, in fact, written by yours truly... I just kept out of the conversation about making it official because I was badly harrassed for creating it when there was no policy about deleting spam pages.

 * I know you see me as "overly libertarian" on a lot of issues, but we probably see things eye-to-eye on most things when it comes to principles. I've taken beatings just as you have, but maybe harsher... my fights have been with good-faith contributors, not spammers and vandals.

 * Daughter wants me, gotta go. -- SB_Johnny | talk 23:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Daughters
Yeah, when daughters call, wikis go out the window, eh? How old is yours?

I have fun on wikipedia... I've administrated web forums too, and the crossfire of wikipedia is nothing compared to something like that, though my web forum experiences do have much do do with my dislike for censorship and punitive behavioral rules. Wikipedia is in a long slow struggle between the serious editors who want an encyclopedia and the propogandists, spammers, and "social editors" who want to use it for other purposes. The current move to make unsourced articles canidates for CSD will make a huge contribution in that direction, much as the spam criteria did a month or two ago.

Anyway... looking for more to do on the garden project tomorrow (going to be raining all day)... do you see anything in w:Category:Gardening that should be brought over first and foremost? -- SB_Johnny | talk 11:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

User 68.225.120.157
I am actually Mateo1983 I forgot to login before I began to go through the recent changes list. Mateo1983 14:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: AWB
We should plan the AWB "runs", so as not to create duplicate effort or the possibility of flooding rc.

PS: Thanks for telling me about the BOTM and COTM discussion.--Az1568 18:35, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Wiki project links
G'day Herby, I noticed the Wikipedia link you added to a page recently, and thought you might like to know about the wiki project short hands. For links into Wikipedia, you can prefix the article name with "w:", e.g. Ammonium bicarbonate. See Help:Interwiki linking for more information. In addition, you can add a link to a sister page in Wikipedia by using the template, which creates a wiki sister project box on the page. See Cookbook:Sauerkraut for an example. Webaware 12:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

 * OOPS - my bad, just noticed that it was an old link, not one that you added. Webaware 12:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for categorizing.
Thanks for adding 2 more categories to Windows registry hacks. Can you please tell me if there exists a link where books are arranged by starting date. Afterall I started this book just 2 Hrs before you categorized. :) -- seXie (t0lk) 12:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Portals
I wonder if there are any portals here just like wikipedia. It would be of great help to keep in touch with people of similar interests. -- seXie ♭♭c 13:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Huh?
Erm, link? -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Brion
Yeah, I guess. Though you can always find him on #wikimedia-tech on freenode (he's the guy who writes wikimedia's software). The stewards should probably be under a different heading anyway, because there are several channels through which they can be reached in an emergency. -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Steward -- SB_Johnny | talk 14:14, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

 * BTW: Brion doesn't appear on that list, but he has access to the steward controls. He uses the account for running experiments to see if changes on wikibooks are made the way he means them to be. -- SB_Johnny | talk 14:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I Need Help!!!
I was wondering if you could help me with the print version of Solar System. I'm not exactly sure how to do it. Tannersf Nov. 19, 2006.

Thanks anyway...
I don't think we need a bunch more bureaucrats all at once... best to just do one of those at a time. If we can get the ball rolling and get more RfAs going on, then I'll happily accept then.

Checkuser would be more appropriate if you're looking for more help with the vandal fighting. If you want to switch noms for that, I'd be more than happy to use those tools. That would help in tracking down the forum spam bot and others :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 12:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

 * "borderline options"??? -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

De-Adminship "Voting"
For future reference, you don't have to vote in support of de-adminship. It's automatic and all that can occur is the contesting of inactivity. Support is already there through the policy. -within focus 19:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

SQL thing
Yeah, I'm not all sure what an SQL server is, but the suggestion was to move those "exam" pages chapters of a book of this title, except one chapter perhaps about the exam. The author is MIA, so I guess it's safe to move it all now. -- SB_Johnny | talk 16:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

 * "FWIW Structured Query Language - for querying databases" -- the book should probably mention that somewhere, eh? :P -- SB_Johnny | talk 17:36, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

 * True, but it never hurts to have a bit of introduction and background, for the curious "passers by" :). I'll be doing some chapters on arborculture which will definitely not be aimed at the amateur gardener, but non-professionals will at least know what it's about and might find it interesting :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 17:46, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikijunior Languages/Manx Gaelic
Cheers for your comment. It's my home country so I have tried to add what I know. Xania 22:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes I'm Manx but I usually claim to be Irish as that's a little bit more well known. Beautiful and prosperous place - a lot like Ireland. Xania 21:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

AWB
Thanks for informing me, I was not aware of this program. Currently I don't think there is any need for an action, since there was no misuse of AWB (I assume that the program adds its "signature" to every edit so it's easy to recognise it). --Derbeth talk 21:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Inactivity
Yeah, I'm around. Watchlist-watching anyway. But I'm otherwise engaged most of the time for the next little bit. Moving again. Thanks for asking =) Kellen T 22:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Templates
Hi Herby,

Thanks for watching my pages for vandalism. That is greatly appreciated. Now about the use of templates. I have been making use of them - perhaps inappropriately, I dunno. There are a lot of Honors that require the same knowledge, and rather than cut-and-paste, I thought it might be easier to capture the info in templates so I could use it in several places. I did this extensively thoughout the First Aid honors (a lot of non-First Aid honors require some first aid information), and I have started using them in the camping honors too. Is there a better way? I don't want the info to appear as links, but rather as in-line.

I had been inserting templates, and then writing them right away, but with the camping honors, I decided I wanted to get the templates in place first - they will appear in three or four differnt places - and THEN start fleshing them out. It was sort of an attempt at marking the overlap so that work would not have to be duplicated.

Most of these are only a paragraph or two long, so they don't really take up a whole chapter. If there is a better way to accomplish this than templates, I would sure ike to know.

Again, I would like to thank you for all your work on Wikibooks, and especially on my project. BTW, the summaries of your reversions usually say something like "using popups" - what does that mean? Jim Thomas 21:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the welcome. Better late than never. Although, judging from the looks of it, I think been here over a year longer than you. 8^) Yet, I still haven't created a user page... I'll do that one of these days... maybe. -Hyad 07:12, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Don't feel bad. I really do appreciate your welcome message. I just found it kind of ironic. I mean I can see how no one has put up a welcome message, my user contributions list don't even fill two pages. (Although, I'd like to think it's quality, rather than quantity that matters :) ) -Hyad 05:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Garden orphans and cats
Hi Herby,

Yeah, the index page is just for collecting them all and keeping them off the orphans list. Sub indexes by subject will come later... I generally move around using the category systems rather than through linked pages.

BTW, almost all of the pages in that book are template-built... I'll add the subpagename tag to the included categories so you won't need to do that :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Nice closed idea. I suggest an improvement :-p
Simple idea. Why don't you turn closed into a template? Too late :-p I already did :-)

Here ya go. closed and its complement end closed. Here is an example.

I've closed this discussion. Blah blah blah blah blah.

Yarr.

Better than dealing with  every few minutes.

--Dragontamer 17:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Heh, I'm sure the color will grow on me. :-p I'm no fan of yellow myself, but it is neutral enough IMO to be a closing thing. They should go quickly into the archives anyway. --Dragontamer 16:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Votes_for_deletion#Organic_Chemistry.2FAcetone_peroxide_synthesis
Herby, as far as I'm concerned, it's all good now. Swift, very swiftly (pun intended) disconnected it from the Organic Chemistry book when this issue first came up and moved it over to Synthesis, so I've been happy since that date. As for whatever Swift wants to do with that content, that's entirely up to him. I simply didn't feel it belonged in a general Organic Chemistry textbook and that was my only concern. -- Pete 18:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Just in case you didn't notice my reply on my talk page. I've looked at the OC book and there is nothing of value that needs to go into the CS book. I'll delete the page soon. --Swift 18:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Request for alphacatting
Hi Herby... could you use your wonderful AWB thing to add cats to the members of Category:WMOG_templates? That would be a huge help to me. They need to be sorted by type, not pagename (i.e., all the things ending in "box" should be under "box", anything ending in "prof" under "prof", etc.... can AWB do that? Also (if I missed any), any of the "includeonly" categories in the "prof" templates should autolist themselves by subpagename... I think I got them all, but it's hard to sort out just now.

I'm getting a bit frustrated because I'm trying to do so many things at once... what I'm working on these days is getting some truly interlinked pages together, where a page about a plant has linked pages to pests and diseases, which in turn have linked pages to sprays and other control methods. I'm hoping to have a well-interconnected web going on by spring, when I'll start using the pages again (i.e., selling them to my clients).

The other goal is to get maybe 200-300 well-interlinked pages together, and then start adding templates on wikipedia to attract more readers and editors come springtime, when northern hemisphere gardeners start looking for horticultural advice. -- SB_Johnny | talk 18:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks! Only the ones ending with "control" are left, but I think there's only 2, so I'll get them. -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:15, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome
Thanks for the welcome, Herby! I worked here at Wikibooks for a little while in 2004, but am mostly new here. I really appreciate the welcome note esp. because of the links; I really need the "Wikibooks for Wikipedians" link. Coming from Wikipedia (where I have made many edits in the past couple of months) is really different; I was first struck by the fact that there are far fewer users, fewer and (what I perceive as) less complex policies, less bureaucracy, and a lot of clean-up to do here at Wikibooks than at Wikipedia. But at the same time, it seems like there is systemically less deletionism here than at Wikipedia, which I find odd, considering how many things were listed for deletion at Wikipedia per day. Anyways, thanks again for the welcome note. Cheers, Iamunknown 02:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

To Herbythyme re MMM
Hey! I think you are right. I was in the process of finding out how to do it, but then the database was down for maintenance. What I want to do is to make a category under MMM called Working Fields. Under it I want subcategories with the common fields, director, cinematographer, editor etc.

And under those, links to relevant pages.

I want to do this to make an eventual restructuring of the MMM easier. I do not want to undertake this task on my own. Just to make it easier to implement.

Regards

--TP81 23:25, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Newbies and page naming
I was thinking that there are some other help pages that need to be merged "start a page", "how to start a book" and others, but once thats been done, we should expand on it to include such things as the proper naming convention through use of examples. Maybe that could help reduce the number of newbies not using the right naming convention. I just need ideas for a new name, I'm not really liking either name, because I think such a help page should cover both starting a book and adding pages to an existing book and the name needs to convay this. --dark lama  12:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandals
User:Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Willy Phone!, and User:Poop are both from the same IP address. I've blocked both account names infinitely, and I've also blocked the source IP address for 2 hours (just long enough, hopefully, for the vandal to get bored). thanks for the heads-up. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 15:43, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointers Thyme!
I will stop and think a bit. ;-) I won't take further action until I'm sure I know what im doing too. :-) --TP81 18:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Welcome
Thanks for the welcome, Herby. As it happens, I am from Wikipedia, where I'm known as Eliyahu S Talk. I've visited WB a time or three, mostly because I'd like to learn Arabic, but for some reason this Wikijunior The Elements book really grabbed me this morning. I guess that means I also need to make a user page for myself here, eh? --Eliyahu 08:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

 * :) --Eliyahu 09:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Image deletion runs
Unforunitly a real bot isn't practical because would need to get both bot and admin status for it to work. This is just meant as a short term solution anyways to get us back to a managable level.

There are a ton of unlicensed images which need to be deleted, but first need to be removed from the pages which use them, so as not to leave a mess behind. Would you be interested in going through the pages that use them and removing the tags from them? I've been using this tool to get a list of images to delete, which can also be useful for this task, since now it should consist mostly of unlicensed images that are in use.

This tool also indicates when the image probably has a specific copyright just doesn't use the proper template, those should probably just have the approperiate template added. There are also a bunch of Blender images that all start with Blender, which are in use, that I feel shouldn't be deleted as of yet, because they most likely qualify for being marked as screenshots and I already talked to someone else about fixing them. --dark lama  13:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Welcome
It's nice to know that someone noticed. ;-) I appreciate anything you feel you can contribute to WJ. I was puzzled by your edits when I first saw them but I figured out the why after a little blundering around. I'm fairly new to Wiki projects in general, so I'm still learning the ropes. Anyway, thanks. --xixtas 04:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Welcomes
Thanks for your message Herby. I raised this point with SBJohhny last night in IRC and he suggested that it was better to post a 'welcome' message when they register rather than waiting even though I pointed out the policy. I see Johnny's point - best to do it now because otherwise it's harder to know if they're making their first edit or not and it's nice to get them now as they may not return for a while. Did I really welcome someone with the username 'online porn' though? What's your opinion about this policy? Xania 20:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

 * LOL... I wasn't aware there was a "welcome policy". Is there really a welcome policy? If so, please mark it for speedy deletion :p.

 * I just think it's better to have them welcomed with a "you have new messages" as they're poking around, and then hopefully following a link or two to see how things work :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think a person can know whether a person is actively present or if the account was created with a bot, until there's some indication of poking around by contributing some edits. Ideally I think it would be best to catch new users while they are editing so they see it right away. However its all just a judgement call on the part of the person doing it. I tend not to welcome new users unless I happen to run across them durring the course of my own contributions and I think that user could benifit from it. --dark lama  13:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree with you but Johnny, and I think Derbeth, seem to see it differently. From my point of view, watching RC, I keep an eye on contributions of named editors with "red" talk links (as well as IPs obviously).  As long as they look ok I usually place a message fairly quickly (if they are not ok they get another message!).  Looks like its been missed for a while - just came across someone with edits going back six months with no welcome, regards -- Herby  talk thyme 13:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

 * When to use the welcome tag is up to each person to decide. If you feel more comfertable with waiting until some contributions have been made than do so. Of cource this means Johnny and Derbeth may very well welcome new users before you have done so, but this isn't a compatition to see who can welcome the new users the quickest. Usage even says its a judgement call that you will have to make. Now I think I might go rephrase it a bit. --dark [[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]] lama 14:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I'll assume you're watching here. Anything is fine with me but the template placing instructions need to be made looser then which I guess is what you are off to do - cheers -- Herby  talk thyme 14:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't bother...
I already blocked him :) -- SB_Johnny | talk 10:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Transwiki to wikisource
Hey... I started looking into that the other then got distracted by RealLife stuff, sorry about that.

Your best bet is to ask at Wikisource:Scriptorium, their version of the staff lounge. -- SB_Johnny | talk 11:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Where was it listed in the first place? I don't understand how wikisource works... they might have import, but I'm really not sure. -- SB_Johnny | talk 11:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, whew!
Nice little vandal storm there, eh? Wikipedia lists at least one of those IPs as an open proxy zombie... I'll bring it up on w:WP:AN so we can maybe get a handle on it.

Now you have mail :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 15:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikibooks future stuff
Hey herby.

"JC" is the only other active admin on that project, and I left him a note on his talk page there about the rather inappropriate behavior of his friend. I haven't checked back in, so I assume that was a reply to what was on his talk (that thing is way wierder than you think... the IRC crew found some very strange info about that situation that we didn't announce on WB). -- SB_Johnny | talk 20:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

transwiki thing
If wikisource says it's copyvio, it probably is. (As you can imagine, what is and is not copyvio is their chief concern due to the nature of their project). -- SB_Johnny | talk 20:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Herbythyme/Compost1


text:
Adventist Youth Honors Answer Book/Insect/Lepidoptera

|


text:
User talk:Dpool688

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page.

Good luck! -- Herby talk thyme 14:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dpool688


text:
User talk:87.102.48.193

Welcome to Wikibooks. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our collection. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks. -- Herby talk thyme 14:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

--AdRiley 11:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:87.102.48.193