Difference between revisions of "User talk:Cameron"

From sasCommunity
Jump to: navigation, search
(recent spam influx: new section)
(recent spam influx: I see spam as just part of the problem of inappropriate content. No need to give it special treatment.)
 
Line 663: Line 663:
  
 
What are your thoughts? I think some form of auto-protection would be best, but this would at least help if users see the spammy pages. = [[User:paulkaefer|paulkaefer]] ([[User talk:paulkaefer|talk]]) 11:02, 19 October 2017 (CDT)
 
What are your thoughts? I think some form of auto-protection would be best, but this would at least help if users see the spammy pages. = [[User:paulkaefer|paulkaefer]] ([[User talk:paulkaefer|talk]]) 11:02, 19 October 2017 (CDT)
 +
 +
:I prefer not to label content that you refer to as ''spam'' with that word, but rather consider it a form of [[sasCommunity:Inappropriate content|inappropriate content]]. Posting such content is a breach of the [[sasCommunity:Terms of Use|Terms of Use]]. As such it should be treated no differently than any other inappropriate content - it gets removed - promptly. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, most users that post such inappropriate content create a new page to do so. Removal is relatively straight forward and can be accomplished by simply blanking the page. Content that is embedded in an existing page is perhaps harder to deal with. Although you can undo the edit, the inappropriate content remains in the page history, so removing it entirely requires a selective removal of the specific edits, which is a lot harder than removing the whole page.
 +
:Also, adding a notice and the removal category is more for the convenience of the site administrators so that they can subsequently find the page and remove it. While adding a polite notice to inform users of what has happened to the page content and explains why the content is removed is also a courtesy to the readers. However, I think this may discourage people who abuse their ability to post content freely on this website. I notice that we do not seem to get a lot of ''repeat business'' once the inappropriate content is removed and the inappropriateness of their offending behavior is explained to the offending users concerned. Posting inappropriate content is far more benign than some other disruptive behaviours I have observed on other wiki websites.
 +
:While some [[sasCommunity:Inappropriate_content#Example_template_of_message_text|template text already exists]] but I am not sure a formal template is needed just for ''spam''. I have found the template text a good starting point but it often needs to be adapted for different situations. Since the page is going to be removed in a few days, I would suggest something really generic, like '''<nowiki>{{not wanted}}</nowiki>''' which basically indicates the page is no longer wanted and can be [[:Category:Remove|remove]]d. The text could say ''This page is not wanted and will be removed soon.'' Sort of the opposite of the [[Special:WantedPages|Wanted Pages]]. - [[User:Cameron|Cameron]] ([[User talk:Cameron|talk]]) 21:15, 1 December 2017 (CST)

Latest revision as of 21:15, 1 December 2017

To leave me a (public) message please add a new topic to this talk page. (click the Add Topic tab.)

Or feel free to add a comment in any of the sections below, or on any talk page where I have left comments.

Gardening

You might have noticed that I have been doing some gardening. Here is an explanation why I edited these pages:

  • sasCommunity:Autoconfirmed users - was the first red link I saw on my own user preference page. This is a big red flag to me because it means that no one is looking after the essential pages needed to build a vibrant wiki community. So I wrote one that points at some relevant wiki links and briefly informs the user who visits that page.
  • sasCommunity:Users - because Mr. Abud had followed the first red link he saw on his preference page and found he could immediately edit an empty page to ask a perfectly reasonable question. Because he was not answered or otherwise informed when that question was asked it appears he might still be waiting for an answer, as that user has not edited another page since then.
  • User_talk:Jeabud - to answer Mr. Abud's question, so he might now be informed, and may want to contribute later.
  • Welcome_to_sasCommunity.org - linked the word Gardener to the article - Gardener_for_sasCommunity.org. Because the gardener(s) needs to start planting the garden somewhere and there is far too much work for just one person to take on. I also thought it appropriate to start here, before I got too carried away.

Cameron 09:13, 1 August 2012 (EDT)

Red Links on Special Pages

I have noticed there are Red Links on some Special Pages. :

User group rights 
Help:Group rights, sasCommunity:Administrators, sasCommunity:Awardsmanage, sasCommunity:Bots, sasCommunity:Bureaucrats, sasCommunity:Giftadmin, sasCommunity:Staff, sasCommunity:Widget editors. These links probably need to be given some content, even if it is just a link to a special page that lists the members of the group.
Wanted categories, Wanted files, Wanted pages, Wanted templates 
The red links on these pages just scream out for someone to create a new category, file, page or template. However, its probably better to fix the source articles that have links to these wanted categories, files, pages and templates in almost all the cases.
Broken redirects 
... happen when a page is first moved and then deleted, without the redirect also being deleted.
Active users list 
Lists the users who are creating and modifying content. The new (and also inexperienced) users are likely to be the ones with red user names and talk pages. Other combinations may suggest users with more experience with a wiki. But what is perhaps more telling is that those users rarely make more than 10 edits in 30 days, and most make less than 5, suggesting that the community has few long term participants and most editors are only transitory visitors.
User list 
If you watch the user creation log carefully you might notice that most users never edit a page, not even their own user page. (As of 5 August 2012 only 2,106 of 9,107 registered users had any page edits - i.e. less than one in 4 users are doing anything more than creating an account.) Why is that? As a wiki is a form of social media, creating a user account but then never making any use of it, not even by saying why you are creating an account, seems somewhat anti-social. But is this really a user problem or is it a social problem with the community not being very user friendly?
Note 
Red Links are not necessarily a bad thing, as Red Links suggest topics that need content. But they also tempt those who may want to provide inappropriate content and are opportunities for abuse. - Cameron 18:50, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

Fixing broken and double redirects

If you have been watching recent changes you might have noticed I spent a few hours today fixing broken and double redirect links. There are some good reasons for tidying up these redirect issues.

Broken redirects normally arise when a page is moved and then deleted or a user edits a page and redirects it to a non existent page. This is undesirable, because if links to these pages appear on another page they are blue - indicating content, (not red - indicating unwritten articles), but anyone following these links is redirected to an empty page and may not understand why the page is empty. Registered users may inadvertantly add content and these sorts of links are invitations for abuse by unethical users - and merely invite deleted content to be replaced - which negates the purpose of deleting it in the first place.

Double redirects, on the other hand, arise because a page is moved multiple times or multiple pages with the same content are created and then merged into one page but the redirects are incorrectly set up. Double redirects break by rendering the second redirect page, not the target page. This is not usually a big problem for humans, they just click another link, but when search engines encounter such pages they may discount the terms associated with the redirect page, because of the lack of content and consequently also devalue the target article in their search results. - Cameron 08:11, 5 August 2012 (EDT)

Gardening the Orphaned and Dead-End Pages

I notice today there are 1,553 orphaned and 1,588 dead-end Pages, with many pages common to both lists. While the statistics show the wiki has 3,006 pages, today, that count does not include dead-end pages. This means perhaps a third of the content of the wiki is not being counted. To improve things is fairly simple, though somewhat time consuming. Add appropriate wikilinks to the dead end pages and wikilink to the orphan pages from other pages. In the process I will get to read a lot of the wiki content! - Cameron 09:05, 5 August 2012 (EDT)

Today the wiki has 5,118 pages, or 2,112 more pages than when I wrote the above comments almost 5 years ago. Since then the number of orphaned and dead-end pages have reduced significantly. Having 804 dead-end page, now, means that almost half of the pages have been dealt with in some way. Recently, a major reduction occurred when many older employment opportunity listings were tagged with an expired template and practice articles were tagged in a similar way. While such exercises may have a significant impact on dead-end articles that are less likely to include wiki-links, they may be less effective for the remaining pages. The orphaned pages are more problematic because that requires links to the pages being put onto other pages, and finding those pages is still a challenge. - Cameron (talk) 20:23, 1 June 2017 (CDT)

Current statistics

As at 04:06 on 11 December 2017 there are 5,259 articles, although if one counts dead-end and orphaned pages, empty and short pages, redirects, and pages in other name spaces, such as talk pages, user pages, templates and categories there are 12,431 pages in total. Of 9,493 users, 14 have made one or more edits in the last 30 days.

Statistics history

Date and Time Articles Pages Users Active Users Orphaned Pages Dead-end Pages Wanted Pages Notes
07:58, 8 August 2012 (EDT) 3,004 8,229 9,112 28 - - - -
22:09, 8 August 2012 (EDT) 3,004 8,229 9,114 27 - - - -
20:53, 9 August 2012 (EDT) 3,005 8,245 9,117 28 1,534 1,574 - -
08:09, 10 August 2012 (EDT) 3,004 8,245 9,118 29 1,507 1,574 - -
19:28, 10 August 2012 (EDT) 3,006 8,255 9,121 29 1,507 1,576 ~212~ -
19:18, 11 August 2012 (EDT) 3,007 8,261 9,121 29 1,508 1,580 ~206~ -
06:01, 12 August 2012 (EDT) 3,007 8,261 9,125 34 1,506 1,581 195 -
06:58, 15 August 2012 (EDT) 3,006 8,268 9,129 34 1,508 1,584 195 User overwrote a page.
08:58, 15 August 2012 (EDT) 3,012 8,268 9,130 34 1,508 1,584 195 Categorised pages.
(several dead-ends)
21:41, 15 August 2012 (EDT) 3,014 8,280 9,134 34 1,506 1,585 196 Retitle Article
09:35, 16 August 2012 (EDT) 3,015 8,288 9,136 35 1,501 1,586 196 Move Articles
21:51, 16 August 2012 (EDT) 3,015 8,288 9,140 35 1,501 1,586 196 No changes
18:17, 17 August 2012 (EDT) 3,017 8,293 9,142 35 1,498 1,586 199 Discussion
17:54, 18 August 2012 (EDT) 3,017 8,293 9,143 35 1,498 1,586 200 Gardening
23:58, 18 August 2012 (EDT) 3,016 8,296 9,144 34 1,498 1,587 148 Redirect an obsolete page.
08:15, 19 August 2012 (EDT) 3,015 8,296 9,144 34 1,497 1,584 150 New article, redirects
21:42, 19 August 2012 (EDT) 3,015 8,303 9,144 34 1,490 1,584 150 Move 7 pages
21:54, 20 August 2012 (EDT) 3,016 8,321 9,147 34 1,473 1,584 150 Move 17 pages
12:23, 21 August 2012 (EDT) 3,017 8,325 9,149 34 1,473 1,585 155 Rant, Move 1 page
07:29, 22 August 2012 (EDT) 3,018 8,330 9,151 36 1,473 1,586 155 Move 1 page
07:04, 23 August 2012 (EDT) 3,019 8,332 9,151 35 1,474 1,587 155 User activity
08:58, 23 August 2012 (EDT) 3,019 8,333 9,152 35 1,408 1,587 173 Links on User groups
08:24, 24 August 2012 (EDT) 3,019 8,341 9,154 35 1,405 1,582 234 Regional User Groups links to states
20:09, 24 August 2012 (EDT) 3,020 8,344 9,156 35 1,401 1,581 241 Links in
Canadian SAS User Groups and
Latin American SAS User Groups‎
06:16, 25 August 2012 (EDT) 3,020 8,368 9,157 36 1,400 1,581 221 Redirects to user group articles
15:50, 26 August 2012 (EDT) 3,020 8,368 9,157 36 1,400 1,581 221 No activity
08:08, 27 August 2012 (EDT) 3,025 8,370 9,157 36 1,399 1,580 229 Turn 5 redirects into pages
04:42, 28 August 2012 (EDT) 3,025 8,370 9,157 36 1,399 1,580 229 User Activity
08:10, 28 August 2012 (EDT) 3,025 8,376 9,157 36 1,379 1,580 229 Linking User Groups
08:33, 29 August 2012 (EDT) 3,026 8,378 9,158 36 1,381 1,581 229 User Activity & Gardening
07:15, 31 August 2012 (EDT) 3,028 8,390 9,163 38 1,382 1,582 229 User Activity
04:22, 2 September 2012 (EDT) 3,030 8,396 9,169 35 1,383 1,583 229 User Activity
07:14, 2 September 2012 (EDT) 3,029 8,404 9,169 35 1,383 1,581 229 Redirects to user group articles
21:49, 2 September 2012 (EDT) 3,028 8,405 9,169 35 1,382 1,581 229 Gardening
07:46, 5 September 2012 (EDT) 3,029 8,407 9,177 36 1,382 1,582 229 User Activity
07:33, 6 September 2012 (EDT) 3,029 8,407 9,180 36 1,382 1,582 229 User Activity & Gardening
20:53, 9 September 2012 (EDT) 3,031 8,414 9,189 34 1,384 1,585 229 User Activity
08:34, 10 September 2012 (EDT) 3,040 8,414 9,189 34 1,384 1,584 229 Gardening
18:15, 13 September 2012 (EDT) 3,046 8,419 9,198 33 1,386 1,584 229 User Activity & Gardening
05:37, 18 September 2012 (EDT) 3,064 8,462 9,223 49 1,400 1,594 242 User Activity
06:11, 25 September 2012 (EDT) 3,068 8,477 9,239 43 1,404 1,599 242 User Activity
19:33, 28 September 2012 (EDT) 3,053 8,452 9,245 41 1,389 1,586 244 33 Pages Deleted & User Activity
16:59, 6 October 2012 (EDT) 3,057 8,463 9,259 43 1,388 1,587 244 User Activity
18:11, 13 October 2012 (EDT) 3,064 8,485 9,267 44 1,393 1,593 242 User Activity
04:27, 23 October 2012 (EDT) 3,066 8,493 9,282 32 1,395 1,595 242 User Activity
06:01, 23 October 2012 (EDT) 3,065 8,494 9,283 32 1,391 1,590 243 Gardening
07:23, 23 October 2012 (EDT) 3,065 8,494 9,283 32 1,390 1,589 243 More Gardening
18:04, 9 November 2012 (EST) 3,077 8,517 9,333 32 1,400 1,597 243 User Activity
17:49, 14 December 2012 (EST) 3,096 8,606 9,402 26 1,410 1,611 244 User Activity
22:49, 22 March 2013 (EDT) 3,147 8,853 9,619 38 1,471 1,667 236 User Activity over 3 months
06:46, 23 March 2013 (EDT) 3,149 8,855 9,619 39 1,469 1,665 236 Gardening
19:21, 30 March 2013 (EDT) 3,154 8,862 9,638 41 1,470 1,666 236 User Activity
04:23, 7 April 2013 (EDT) 3,157 8,877 9,658 41 1,471 1,666 250 User Activity and a bit of gardening
16:37, 12 April 2013 (EDT) 3,161 8,906 9,676 37 1,471 1,659 265 User Activity and a bit of gardening
20:02, 13 April 2013 (EDT) 3,162 8,909 9,678 33 1,469 1,657 265 Gardening
17:11, 19 April 2013 (EDT) 3,161 8,905 9,689 29 1,467 1,653 265 Gardening, 4 Deletions and some activity
03:39, 21 April 2013 (EDT) 3,162 8,907 9,691 27 1,464 1,651 265 Gardening
05:00, 25 April 2013 (EDT) 3,163 8,911 9,695 31 1,464 1,652 264 Gardening and some user activity
07:29, 30 April 2013 (EDT) 3,164 8,917 9,707 34 1,467 1,653 264 User activity
08:17, 1 May 2013 (EDT) 3,210 8,932 9,724 46 1,478 1,663 267 User activity and gardening
08:42, 3 May 2013 (EDT) 3,217 8,934 9,734 45 1,478 1,662 267 User activity and gardening
22:49, 4 May 2013 (EDT) 3,218 8,938 9,737 46 1,480 1,662 267 User activity and gardening
06:13, 16 May 2013 (EDT) 3,225 8,961 9,761 51 1,481 1,665 269 User activity
05:54, 18 May 2013 (EDT) 3,224 8,963 9,766 51 1,481 1,665 269 User activity and 3 pages removed
08:25, 18 May 2013 (EDT) 3,225 8,966 9,767 51 1,480 1,665 269 Write a wanted article and add some new talk page discussions
21 - 23 May 2013 ?,??? ?,??? ?,??? ?? 1,481 1,668 271 User activity
06:41, 24 May 2013 (EDT) 3,231 8,990 9,775 50 1,479 1,666 271 Gardening
08:12, 24 May 2013 (EDT) 3,231 8,990 9,775 49 1,472 1,665 272 Gardening some more
10:31, 26 May 2013 (EDT) 3,233 8,991 9,775 45 1,472 1,665 271 Contribute an article and some more gardening
06:22, 28 May 2013 (EDT) 3,233 8,998 9,776 43 1,472 1,665 271 User activity and gardening
07:50, 28 May 2013 (EDT) 3,236 9,001 9,776 43 1,472 1,665 275 Contribute 3 new articles.
10:03, 1 June 2013 (EDT) 3,236 9,002 9,790 36 1,467 1,661 276 User activity, 2 deletions and some gardening.
11:05, 1 June 2013 (EDT) 3,236 9,003 9,790 36 1,467 1,655 276 Some gardening & user activity creates a new talk page.
04:55, 2 June 2013 (EDT) 3,237 9,006 9,790 34 1,461 1,650 277 Gardening, user activity & some new pages.
07:48, 2 June 2013 (EDT) 3,237 9,006 9,790 34 1,454 1,649 277 Gardening, wikilinking and content.
07:21, 3 June 2013 (EDT) 3,238 9,008 9,792 33 1,454 1,649 278 Gardening.
08:29, 6 June 2013 (EDT) 3,240 9,016 9,804 34 1,452 1,649 276 User activity & gardening.
22:25, 7 June 2013 (EDT) 3,243 9,037 9,808 33 1,453 1,650 276 User activity, new pages & a deletion.
07:47, 8 June 2013 (EDT) 3,243 9,041 9,809 33 1,452 1,649 275 Gardening, redirect a page & new page.
06:57, 9 June 2013 (EDT) 3,243 9,046 9,810 32 1,450 1,648 274 Gardening.
07:49, 10 June 2013 (EDT) 3,248 9,050 9,811 29 1,444 1,645 273 Gardening geographic articles.
08:31, 12 June 2013 (EDT) 3,248 9,053 9,819 29 1,433 1,634 273 Gardening master index articles.
08:38, 16 June 2013 (EDT) 3,247 9,061 9,826 26 1,432 1,634 273 Gardening, move and discuss Vision Statement, leading to me discussing sasCommunity:Goals.
08:27, 18 June 2013 (EDT) 3,247 9,066 9,828 27 1,432 1,634 273 Add sasCommunity:Is not Wikipedia
08:26, 19 June 2013 (EDT) 3,247 9,066 9,828 27 1,430 1,631 274 Gardening
18:05, 10 August 2013 (EDT) 3,262 9,135 9,845 28 1,438 1,640 274 User activity
15:52, 11 October 2013 (CDT) 3,292 9,320 7,446 45 1,485 1,670 288 Wiki Rehosted during this period. User cleanup.
18:25, 11 October 2013 (CDT) 3,295 9,330 7,446 46 1,488 1,670 283 Gardening. Unlink some wanted pages.
06:14, 12 October 2013 (CDT) 3,298 9,331 7,446 46 1,488 1,668 278 Gardening. Removing spam.
17:21, 2 November 2013 (CDT) 3,311 9,374 7,486 46 1,489 1,669 276 User activity.
18:05, 2 November 2013 (CDT) 3,311 9,378 7,486 46 1,485 1,669 276 Gardening. Rename 4 job titles.
17:50, 16 November 2013 (CST) 3,315 9,393 7,517 30 1,494 1,674 276 User activity.
05:04, 17 November 2013 (CST) 3,322 9,397 7,517 30 1,491 1,671 275 Gardening. Create 4 new pages.
14:45, 22 November 2013 (CST) 3,323 9,422 7,538 30 1,493 1,672 276 User activity.
04:52, 27 November 2013 (CST) 3,342 9,461 7,550 30 1,505 1,666 292 User activity & Gardening.
16:57, 30 November 2013 (CST) 3,344 9,461 7,552 29 1,505 1,664 292 User activity.
16:32, 27 December 2013 (CST) 3,350 9,518 7,583 17 1,508 1,664 292 User activity.
19:17, 1 January 2014 (CST) 3,351 9,527 7,588 17 1,508 1,665 294 User activity.
17:21, 20 February 2014 (CST) 3,364 9,586 7,614 34 1,501 1,677 306 User activity.
03:55, 3 March 2014 (CST) 3,373 9,598 7,613 43 1,497 1,676 303 User activity.
17:59, 15 March 2014 (CDT) 3,379 9,662 7,633 43 1,492 1,679 304 User activity.
16:01, 22 March 2014 (CDT) 3,408 9,707 7,650 37 1,504 1,666 306 User activity.
05:05, 24 March 2014 (CDT) 3,419 9,716 7,651 37 1,508 1,660 306 Gardening & User activity.
06:27, 24 March 2014 (CDT) 3,423 9,716 7,651 37 1,508 1,656 312 Gardening dead end statement notes.
04:31, 25 March 2014 (CDT) 3,428 9,721 7,653 37 1,505 1,650 312 Gardening dead end pages.
16:36, 28 March 2014 (CDT) 3,436 9,777 7,670 41 1,509 1,651 313 User Activity.
04:33, 31 March 2014 (CDT) 3,436 9,783 7,673 40 1,509 1,652 313 User Activity.
06:23, 31 March 2014 (CDT) 3,438 9,783 7,673 40 1,503 1,649 313 Gardening orphaned and dead end pages.
03:05, 1 April 2014 (CDT) 3,443 9,786 7,673 40 1,501 1,644 313 Gardening orphaned and dead end pages and some User Activity.
06:04, 1 April 2014 (CDT) 3,450 9,786 7,673 40 1,497 1,637 313 Gardening orphaned and dead end pages.
06:25, 2 April 2014 (CDT) 3,459 9,787 7,674 38 1,493 1,628 313 Gardening orphaned and dead end pages and some User Activity.
06:42, 4 April 2014 (CDT) 3,485 9,802 7,681 38 1,492 1,604 328 Gardening orphaned and dead end pages and some User Activity.
04:53, 9 April 2014 (CDT) 3,508 9,924 7,689 42 1,505 1,604 328 User Activity.
06:15, 19 April 2014 (CDT) 3,516 9,974 7,706 48 1,505 1,607 328 User Activity.
07:08, 19 April 2014 (CDT) 3,516 9,974 7,706 48 1,477 1,607 328 Add list of orphaned articles with links to Systems Seminar Consultants‎ website.
22:51, 19 April 2014 (CDT) 3,516 9,975 7,707 48 1,474 1,607 328 Gardening and user activity.
05:07, 29 April 2014 (CDT) 3,524 9,994 7,721 44 1,467 1,608 318 Gardening and user activity.
06:10, 11 May 2014 (CDT) 3,530 10,014 7,740 44 1,121 1,612 317 User activity, including an administrator's edit to the employment opportunities page that caused deorphaning of many job listings as the page DPL was recomputed.
06:01, 17 May 2014 (CDT) 3,532 10,022 7,749 37 1,119 1,615 318 User activity and gardening.
07:34, 17 May 2014 (CDT) 3,535 10,022 7,749 37 1,115 1,612 318 Gardening - added links to 3 dead-end pages I recently created. Note the increase in the number of articles, yet number of pages has not changed.
04:55, 23 May 2014 (CDT) 3,535 10,034 7,760 37 1,119 1,618 318 User activity.
06:29, 29 May 2014 (CDT) 3,539 10,054 7,768 38 1,114 1,613 320 User activity.
04:46, 18 June 2014 (CDT) 3,547 10,094 7,804 36 1,111 1,614 319 User activity.
07:56, 18 June 2014 (CDT) 3,547 10,094 7,806 36 1,110 1,614 319 Gardening.
07:56, 18 June 2014 (CDT) 3,552 10,097 7,810 36 1,104 1,608 319 User activity plus some gardening of dead-end pages and links to orphan pages.
16:18, 11 October 2014 (CDT) 3,585 10,302 8,053 29 1,145 1,637 332 Updated after 3-4 months break.
19:04, 11 October 2014 (CDT) 3,585 10,302 8,053 29 1,145 1,637 323 Updated MediaWiki feature list‎ to redirect red links to MediaWiki pages.
15:37, 1 November 2014 (CDT) 3,606 10,320 8,097 41 1,151 1,644 326 User activity.
17:31, 28 November 2014 (CST) 3,623 10,353 8,137 33 1,141 1,641 317 User activity and some gardening.
02:48, 19 December 2014 (CST) 3,625 10,396 8,168 32 1,149 1,650 319 User activity.
18:16, 29 December 2014 (CST) 3,627 10,396 8,178 29 1,143 1,648 319 User activity and some gardening.
04:08, 30 December 2014 (CST) 3,630 10,403 8,178 29 1,135 1,647 315 Some gardening.
13:48, 30 December 2014 (CST) 3,633 10,406 8,179 29 1,134 1,647 315 Gardening to de-orphan 3 new pages after some user activity.
16:26, 30 December 2014 (CST) 3,635 10,410 8,179 29 1,129 1,645 315 Some more gardening to de-orphan pages.
16:06, 6 January 2015 (CST) 3,646 10,425 8,183 25 1,128 1,642 312 Gardening external links to wiki and some User activity.
05:09, 9 January 2015 (CST) 3,650 10,438 8,185 25 1,128 1,640 314 Gardening external links to wiki and some User activity.
18:49, 9 January 2015 (CST) 3,652 10,446 8,185 27 1,125 1,638 315 Gardening external links to wiki.
17:13, 10 January 2015 (CST) 3,653 10,446 8,187 27 1,124 1,635 315 Gardening external links to wiki. Users redirect 2 pages.
03:42, 11 January 2015 (CST) 3,658 10,455 8,187 27 1,121 1,630 315 Gardening external links to wiki.
05:39, 11 January 2015 (CST) 3,662 10,456 8,187 27 1,120 1,626 315 Gardening external links to wiki.
07:54, 13 January 2015 (CST) 3,670 10,462 8,190 27 1,112 1,618 315 Gardening external links to wiki and some user activity.
08:13, 13 January 2015 (CST) 3,671 10,462 8,190 27 1,111 1,617 315 Gardening an external link to wiki file and add wikilinks.
16:10, 13 January 2015 (CST) 3,674 10,466 8,192 27 1,107 1,614 315 Gardening external links to wiki.
05:01, 20 January 2015 (CST) 3,683 10,487 8,212 27 1,102 1,610 316 Gardening and user activity.
23:37, 20 January 2015 (CST) 3,683 10,493 8,224 27 1,105 1,614 316 Gardening + 6 jobs added, & 1 page removed.
04:23, 21 January 2015 (CST) 3,689 10,493 8,225 27 1,105 1,608 316 Gardening dead-end pages with wiki links.
05:07, 21 January 2015 (CST) 3,692 10,493 8,225 27 1,105 1,605 316 Gardening 3 more dead-end pages with wiki links.
08:29, 28 January 2015 (CST) 3,699 10,506 8,237 29 1,107 1,602 316 Gardening (links) and some user activity (jobs).
15:41, 28 January 2015 (CST) 3,701 10,507 8,239 29 1,107 1,600 316 Gardening (2) dead-end pages and some new user activity.
18:15, 28 January 2015 (CST) 3,703 10,507 8,239 29 1,098 1,598 316 Gardening dead-end pages.
18:24, 28 January 2015 (CST) 3,703 10,507 8,239 29 1,097 1,598 316 Gardening a link to an orphaned page.
17:08, 29 January 2015 (CST) 3,708 10,509 8,240 31 1,097 1,592 315 Gardening and user activity.
04:14, 31 January 2015 (CST) 3,711 10,523 8,240 31 1,078 1,591 305 Gardening in dead-end and wanted pages and editing Presentation: pages to refresh the DPL.
22:06, 31 January 2015 (CST) 3,721 10,528 8,242 31 1,076 1,584 310 Gardening in dead-end and wanted pages, add some new articles.
06:13, 1 February 2015 (CST) 3,722 10,531 8,242 31 1,074 1,584 318 Gardening wanted pages for statements, add some new articles.
15:17, 5 February 2015 (CST) 3,732 10,541 8,251 31 1,074 1,582 324 Gardening and User activity. 4 new jobs listed.
14:47, 7 February 2015 (CST) 3,737 10,550 8,252 26 1,064 1,579 329 Creating some content for and wikilinks to statements and procedures. User activity.
06:58, 8 February 2015 (CST) 3,742 10,556 8,252 26 1,060 1,575 337 Gardening wikilinks to statements and procedures. User activity.
05:53, 9 February 2015 (CST) 3,747 10,557 8,252 26 1,058 1,570 338 Gardening dead-end and orphan pages. User activity.
05:40, 10 February 2015 (CST) 3,748 10,585 8,253 26 1,055 1,570 335 Gardening dead-end and orphan pages. User activity.
17:29, 13 February 2015 (CST) 3,754 10,605 8,264 28 1,057 1,571 335 User activity.
15:58, 14 February 2015 (CST) 3,764 10,613 8,265 28 1,056 1,569 336 Gardening (+3 new pages) and User activity (+5 new jobs).
18:19, 21 February 2015 (CST) 3,776 10,625 8,273 29 1,055 1,560 338 User activity and some gardening.
00:14, 28 February 2015 (CST) 3,778 10,634 8,282 30 1,060 1,565 338 User activity and a little bit of gardening.
02:48, 26 April 2015 (CDT) 3,803 10,726 8,349 26 1,078 1,577 348 User activity.
23:04, 29 December 2015 (CST) 3,882 11,161 8,674 14 1,173 1,683 350 User activity over several months.
13:50, 1 February 2016 (CST) 3,888 11,199 8,720 15 1,165 1,683 351 User activity over about a month.
21:01, 24 April 2017 (CDT) 4,328 12,117 9,262 19 1,269 1,574 402 User activity over about 15 months.
08:58, 2 May 2017 (CDT) 4,330 12,147 9,268 22 1,255 1,575 400 User activity over about 8 days.
00:57, 14 May 2017 (CDT) 4,332 12,163 9,286 22 1,171 1,579 396 User activity over about 12 days.
06:29, 17 May 2017 (CDT) 4,671 12,187 9,288 22 1,168 1,242 395 Activity last week includes expiring employment opportunities, many were dead ends and orphans.
07:08, 18 May 2017 (CDT) 4,829 12,187 9,290 18 1,166 1,084 395 Activity last week includes expiring employment opportunities, many were dead ends and orphans.
01:05, 20 May 2017 (CDT) 5,052 12,189 9,293 18 1,167 862 394 More activity expiring employment opportunities that were dead end pages.
07:11, 23 May 2017 (CDT) 5,059 12,190 9,295 16 1,163 855 397 More activity expiring employment opportunities that were dead end pages.
23:45, 26 May 2017 (CDT) 5,064 12,217 9,300 16 1,150 858 394 User activity and gardening.
05:48, 27 May 2017 (CDT) 5,110 12,218 9,300 16 1,150 817 394 Gardening practice articles.
05:10, 31 May 2017 (CDT) 5,118 12,220 9,302 16 1,147 804 377 More gardening practice articles and other pages.
07:57, 3 June 2017 (CDT) 5,151 12,226 9,305 13 1,117 773 377 More gardening of orphan and dead-end pages.
06:31, 5 June 2017 (CDT) 5,165 12,228 9,305 13 1,049 759 383 Further gardening of orphan and dead-end pages.
08:34, 6 June 2017 (CDT) 5,167 12,228 9,306 13 1,039 757 383 More gardening to de-orphan pages.
06:33, 25 June 2017 (CDT) 5,189 12,262 9,327 21 1,033 754 390 User activity and some gardening.
06:02, 27 June 2017 (CDT) 5,193 12,268 9,328 18 1,026 751 396 User activity and some more gardening.
07:15, 4 July 2017 (CDT) 5,193 12,275 9,336 21 1,022 752 404 User activity and more gardening.
06:02, 6 July 2017 (CDT) 5,197 12,275 9,337 21 1,018 751 402 User activity and some gardening.
06:56, 11 July 2017 (CDT) 5,205 12,279 9,339 21 1,018 742 404 User activity and some gardening.
~now~ 5,259 12,431 9,493 14 ~1,018~ ~742~ ~404~ ~

Rants

Rant (1) n loud excited speech. (2) vb to talk in a loud and excited way. (Dutch ranten to rave.)

You can get involved! Please contribute and improve, or discuss, what is already here.

sasCommunity Guru status

I am amazed at how easy I have achieved the first 10,000 points needed for Guru status. I wasn't even trying hard, just fixing some basic wiki issues on a lazy Sunday afternoon was the bulk of my effort. However, I must admit I expect the next 10,000 points might be a bit harder to achieve. - Cameron 05:43, 7 August 2012 (EDT)

I have now exceeded 20,000 points. The score now at 21,300, so I probably passed the mark during the last 24 hours. Still it only took a week, and I still wasn't trying very hard. - Cameron 21:57, 16 August 2012 (EDT)
With my previous edit I have attained 30,000 points! (Time to go back to bed.) - Cameron 12:30, 21 August 2012 (EDT)
With my recent edits I have now passed 40,000 points! (But now lunch is finished and it's time to get back to work.) - Cameron 21:40, 29 August 2012 (EDT)
My most recent edit has taken me to 60,000 points. ... Clearly one needs to be persistent. But then I have also been busy and not devoted as much time to gardening as I did at first. Then there are the diminishing returns as the low hanging fruit is plucked with and one needs to work harder and think more deeply about the gardening that needs to be done. - Cameron 07:18, 7 April 2013 (EDT)
The early October 2013 MediaWiki Upgrade has meant that the editor status and editing points features have been discontinued. Perhaps this is a good thing. Before that happened, I had over 100,000 points and was placed among the top 10 editors. This merely reflected the quantity of my edits, not their quality. And it is quality that matters. On reflection, I could probably have doubled my score if I did not preview my edits and correct all the typo's I make before committing them to the wiki. Also, perhaps a better guide is the number of Active Users participating on the wiki and the number of edits they are making. The core of the sasCommunity are those editors that consistently appear on this list. Even if they don't edit a lot of pages. - Cameron (talk) 18:30, 2 November 2013 (CDT)

Invitation


Cameron, Thank you for your contributions to the sasCommunity site. If you are interested, the Community Advisory Board, the group that manages the site would be interested in taking advantage of your wiki knowledge by including you on the team. If you are interested please let me know. Art Carpenter, Chair of the Community Advisory Board --Art Carpenter (talk) 00:39, 10 April 2014 (CDT)

Thanks for the Invitation. I will need to think about this a bit, and may want to know more information. - Cameron (talk) 19:25, 14 April 2014 (CDT)
There would not be much increase (in terms of time) in the commitment that you are already showing to the site. The difference would be that it would be easier for us to tap into your expertise. You have already shown that you have some really good ideas on various topics on how we can make the site better. I would like to raise the visibility of your thoughts as well as to have your contributions to things that we are working on that have not yet hit the main site. Currently there is also a development wiki for testing and a separate wiki for the Community Advisory Board. As a CAB member you would also have access to those sites and could help influence us there as well. Most of us on the team come to the site as SAS programmers and do not necessarily have the kind of wiki expertise that the site needs.--Art Carpenter (talk) 15:05, 17 April 2014 (CDT)
Congratulations on winning the 2015 Green Thumb (Gardening) Award! -- Charlie Shipp (talk) 19:42, 3 May 2015 (CDT)

Merger suggestions and discussion

Descriptive Statistics for Healthcare 
Discuss redirecting to Descriptive Statistics for Healthcare Data Analysis using the SAS® System at Talk:Descriptive Statistics for Healthcare and Talk:Descriptive Statistics for Healthcare Data Analysis using the SAS® System - 02:07, 11 January 2015 (CST)
List Processing Basics Creating and Using Lists of Macro Variables 
Discussed at Talk:List Processing Basics Creating and Using Lists of Macro Variables, Talk:SGF2007.113, and Talk:Using Lists of Macro Variables - 18:39 to 18:43, 9 January 2015 (CST)
Systems Seminar Consultants and Systems Seminar Consultants Opportunities 
Discussed at Talk:Systems Seminar Consultants Opportunities - 18:02, 4 April 2014 (CDT)
AJAX and SAS: Smooth Web Applications 
Discussed at 201-2007: AJAX and SAS: Smooth Web Applications, AJAX and SAS: Smooth Web Applications. - 19:52, 13 April 2013 (EDT)
Meta-Xceed, Inc. 
Discussed at Talk:Meta-Xceed, Inc., Talk:Meta-Xceed, Inc, Talk:Meta-Xceed, Inc. Presentations and Talk:Meta-Xceed, Inc. Services. - 05:12, 28 August 2012 (EDT)
Toronto Area SAS Society (TASS
Discussed at Talk:Toronto Area SAS Society, Talk:TASS (Toronto Area SAS Society) and Toronto Area SAS Society (TASS). - 20:41 to 20:52, 15 August 2012 (EDT)
South Carolina SUG 
Discussed at Talk:South Carolina SUG that South Carolina SUG merge into South Carolina SAS Users Group (SCSUG) - 06:17, 2 September 2012 (EDT)
Philadelphia Area SAS Users Group 
Discussed merging Philadelphia Area SAS Users Group with Philadelphia Area SAS Users Group (PhilaSUG) at Talk:Philadelphia Area SAS Users Group and Talk:Philadelphia Area SAS Users Group (PhilaSUG) - 06:50, 2 September 2012 (EDT)
Redirected 
Greater Cincinnati Area SAS User Group to Greater Cincinnati, Ohio Area SAS User Group
Explained 
Seattle Area SAS Users Group now defunct and that Seattle Area SAS Users should go to Puget Sound SAS Users Group (PugSUG).

Disclosing Private Correspondence about My concerns for the sasCommunity.org Wiki

In late April 2013, I received a private communication from a user on the committee taking care of the sasCommunity.org Wiki who sought my assistance, asking:

... You've got great points - FAQ, Rules, etc ... do you have a recommendation where to get started? We've been around a while, we've tried to provide users with instruction and background. ...

While it is not my usual practice to reveal the content of a private communication, on this occasion I indicated that I would make my response public. Part of my reason for doing this is because my response to this communication was delayed because the message was sent by a means I was not familiar with on a wiki and I was not alerted to its arrival in a timely way. I only check the e-mail address I used for the sasCommunity occasionally, as it receives a lot of junk mail. Consequently, I missed your message when it was posted and have only noticed it in the last day or so, [mid-May 2013] and have only now had time to respond.

Since I don't normally read my own profile page on a Wiki, unless I go and edit it, I also missed seeing your message posted on the board there too. I suppose that is a bit of a culture shift I will have to get used to with the sasCommunity. On other wiki, users communicate via talk pages, either their own talk page or article talk pages. That way if another user comments on anything I have said the changes are alerted to me via my watch list and highlighted in recent changes (I check recent changes when I visit the sasCommunity or other wiki just to keep up to date with what is happening.) Unfortunately, messages posted on message boards don't appear in recent changes and don't seem to generate a wiki alert to a message being left. Perhaps this is one reason why there needs to be more explanatory information about how various wiki features work and how to use them effectively.

My first concern about the sasCommunity wiki is the small size (perhaps even a complete lack) of a "Community" of contributors. Yes, there are contributors but they appear to be individuals acting in isolation, not a community of collaborating users who improve on each others contributions, continuously. In the 9 months or so since I first logged on, I think that I have only had 2 or 3 other users respond to any of the comments I have left on a talk page about an article. I was beginning to think nobody else was interested. I am relieved that is not the case.

What is vital is that contributors need to be empowered to contribute. While I see a lot of users registering, almost none of those newly registered users are becoming wiki contributors. I am not sure why that is, but I suspect the lack of guidelines about what is and is not acceptable is a contributing factor. While you could pick up a "manual of style" from another wiki and ask users to abide by it, I think it would be better if the sasCommunity users wrote it themselves, as this would then be the sasCommunity consensus on what the "rules" are.

Also, the lack of a welcoming committee to greet new users (or contributors) by posting a message full of helpful links on the user's talk page may also be discouraging. Wikipedia, for example, uses the slogan "Be Bold" and advises its editors to edit first and seek consensus later. In a similar vein Wikitravel asks editors to "Plunge Forward" and edit. The sasCommunity already has the ready made exhortation of "Contribute" appearing on its pages. I would have the sasCommunity users amplify on this theme.

Lastly, for a sasCommunity wiki to work well, consensus on what the sasCommunity users want (or need) is also a requirement. While I can impose my views and write some "rules", that may not be what the sasCommunity really needs. Like Justice, consensus not only needs to be achieved but it needs to be seen to be achieved.

Rather than start here in a private e-mail, I would prefer to start by building consensus about how the sasCommunity wiki should operate by taking the principles, guidelines and suggestions from many of the existing articles in the sasCommunity category and using them to seed the sasCommunity: name space with some starter articles to build upon.

For example: there is a lot of advice about "Gardening" the wiki (ie wiki maintenance.) this could be collected into a page or set of pages for the "Gardening" project. Out of this would come a manual of style and some guidelines for collaborating with (or tolerating the activities of) other users. Also the Sasopedia is in need of a project page to revive this worthy effort. There are some other things happening on the wiki that would also benefit from having a dedicated project page or two.

In the coming days and weeks I will take what I have said above and make a start in the public forum of the sasCommunity wiki. This will probably start with putting a copy (or paraphrasing) of this email onto my talk page and seeing where it takes me in the wiki.

I hope that by disclosing this correspondence it will assist other users understanding where I am coming from. I would welcome comment from other users. - Cameron 23:22, 2 June 2013 (EDT)

PS:Wikilinks were added later and were not in my original e-mail. - Cameron 23:35, 2 June 2013 (EDT)

(New) Rule: Capitalise SAS Keywords in Article Titles about Keywords.

I just moved an article titled delete (or Delete, since the wiki capitalises the first letter of every title) to DELETE. In doing so I think I have formalised a convention I have noticed here that SAS keywords should be in capital letters in article titles. I can think of several reasons to do this:

  1. Although SAS is not case sensitive, SAS converts all keywords to capitals internally before processing them.
  2. SAS documentation refers to all keywords in capital letters.
  3. SAS keywords might have a different meaning than their ordinary English meaning.
  4. Because the first letter of the first word of a wiki article title is capitalised, keywords should be capitalised, for consistency.

This also raises some issues like:

  • Should we have keyword articles and what should they be like?
  • Should there be an index or dictionary of keywords?
  • Where should these rules be documented for all to refer to? - (My user page is probably not the best place to do that.)
  • Should the rules (if there are any) document an accepted convention or set out principles, or both?

Does anybody else have any thoughts they would like to contribute on this matter before I make more decisions? - Cameron 07:15, 3 June 2013 (EDT)

There are some typographic conventions that are used for books and also for papers for SAS Global Forum. They can be found on the SAS Global Forum website. I'll try to dig them up and to add a link to them. --Otterm1 (talk) 09:56, 3 April 2014 (CDT)
When you do find them, perhaps it would be a good idea to create a wiki article that refers to the document concerned. A quick search suggests that writing SAS key words in capitals is a commonly accepted convention. It is mentioned here and here for example. - Cameron (talk) 18:35, 3 April 2014 (CDT)
You can see this in the category names of functions and statements. This has been an ongoing gardening exercise for newer folks. And was enforced rather strictly in my last couple of books.--Art Carpenter (talk) 15:13, 17 April 2014 (CDT)
While I can see this sort of policy in action in the titles and text of articles, it is not explicitly stated as a rule or guideline. One issue I have with the sasCommunity.org wiki is that some contributors are working with unwritten rules and conventions that really should be documented for the benefit of the whole community. The best way to document such rules is through articles in the sasCommunity namespace - at least that is how it has been done on other wiki I have used. -- Cameron (talk) 05:30, 19 April 2014 (CDT)
Sounds like a very good idea. Since you have experience on other wikis as well, would you be interested in taking a stab at this?--Art Carpenter (talk) 01:23, 20 April 2014 (CDT)
Yes. I think the place to start is probably to document (refactor) this discussion with a sasCommunity namespace articlee about sasCommunity:Titles and then see what additional thoughts other people also contribute. - Cameron (talk) 15:37, 25 April 2014 (CDT)

Interwiki links

Interwiki prefixes allow users to link to a page on another wiki by using a prefix, rather than the full URL. The link to the other wiki's page is then treated as an internal wiki link rather than an external URL, and looks like a wikilink to another namespace.

[[prefix:WikiPage]]

The list of interwiki prefixes that can be used instead of URL's is given on the api.php page.

Here are some of the more significant interwiki links that editors might want to use:

However, Wikipedia was not included in the default interwiki list, so cannot be linked to by interwiki links. Also the Wikimedia Foundation projects Wikiversity, Wikivoyage, Wikidata and MediaWiki were created after the default list was compiled, so cannot be interwiki linked to either. - Cameron 08:44, 22 June 2013 (EDT)

Changing external links to wiki links

Thanks for Converting my PROC CONTENTS page to the wiki link. --Otterm1 (talk) 09:57, 3 April 2014 (CDT)

I have discovered that there are a number of external links on wiki pages that point to other wiki articles. Changing those external links to the corresponding wiki links has some advantages. Internalising these external links as wiki links means a range of special pages and other wiki features can be used. Most important you can now find what pages link to the page you are looking at. Also, many of the pages were considered to be dead-end pages, which don't count as being content pages! Changing the links means the number of valid pages increases, even though the total number of pages remains unchanged. In changing the links I have corrected some errors, where the original link did not point to the correct page. To find the page I used the special page for External link search and searched for links with a http://www.sascommunity.org/wiki/ prefix. Having found the pages with the links, I could then edit them as appropriate. - Cameron (talk) 18:55, 3 April 2014 (CDT)

Remove Category Gardening

First, thanks for your continued work in identifying spam, etc. Would like your opinion on how long after an article is tagged for the Remove category we should wait before an admin (usually me) deletes the page. Currently the Remove category specifies we will wait:

appropriate time period (typically 30 days)

before deleting the page. Considering shortening that to 10 days. And since the current value of 30 days is not a hard/fast number, there is no reason that we could not have the change apply immediately. --Don Henderson (talk) 15:53, 26 February 2014 (CST)

I think the time that should elapse before removing a page should depend on the content of the page and/or the reason for removal being proposed. Wikipedia has "speedy deletion" criteria (see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion), this includes Unambiguous advertising or promotion (see Wikipedia:Spam ) and similar policy violations. The benchmark here would be breaches of the Terms of Use. However, in the absence of a more detailed policy or guideline about what constitutes a breach of the Terms of Use, how to recognise it, and what will happen to offenders in specific situations, it is a bit hard to say what is an appropriate (shorter) time period.
Wikipedia has far more detailed guidelines, policy and standards. But thats because Wikipedians also debate removals far more robustly than is done here in the SASCommunity. There also tends to be a range of views about what is appropriate to remove or keep (See Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia) and when to do so. The sasCommunity hasn't developed such a consensus, yet, probably because the sasCommunity hasn't discussed the matter in sufficient detail amongst enough users to even have an inkling about what the community thinks. With that in mind, here is what I think might be appropriate.
  • Page titles, including user names, that are clearly offensive, insulting or defamatory - removed as soon as they are identified and user warned, and user ban if repeat offender after warning.
  • Page titles obviously intended as advertising or promotion of a product or service not related to SAS.
    • First occasion - 7 days after user e-mailed a warning or message left on their user or talk page.
    • Second and subsequent occasions or instances before being warned - 7 days after the first warning.
    • Any occasion after being warned - Immediate removal and user ban if persistent offender after warning.
  • Page content contains clearly offensive, insulting or defamatory language or is obviously intended as advertising or promotion of a product or service not related to SAS.
    • First occasion - 7 days after user e-mailed a warning or message left on their user or talk page.
    • Second and subsequent occasions or instances before being warned - 7 days after the first warning.
    • Any occasion after being warned - Immediate blanking of content and removal of page history after 7 days.
      • However, there may be a good reason to retain or rehabilitate the title as a suitable article or retain it as a User page (unless the user has also been permanently banned), so removal of the blanked page itself should take 30 days.
    • User ban if persistent offender after repeated warnings.
  • Resurrecting removed pages, without discussion or an explanation, when they were removed for the reasons above should incur the penalty above for repeat or persistent offenders stated above.
  • User and talk pages should be only removed if a user is permanently banned and the page title is clearly offensive, insulting or defamatory or the only contributions made by the user have all been removed or blanked because of the above reasons.
  • In any other case, removal 30 days after being proposed, unless there is no opposition or rational debate about why the page should be retained.
Too harsh? It might be useful if we disuss this further on a page called sasCommunity Talk:Deleting articles as I have a few more thoughts about this topic. - Cameron (talk) 19:48, 26 February 2014 (CST)

Great input. I also agree that discussing this further at sasCommunity Talk:Deleting articles is a good idea. I am going to suggest that someone on the Advisory Board take a point position on the issues you raise here and that can be discussed as you suggest. Do you want to post your above thoughts, as well as your additional ones at sasCommunity Talk:Deleting articles so there is a single (more appropriate) place for those discussions? --Don Henderson (talk) 07:33, 27 February 2014 (CST)

Mediawiki Question

Cameron,

The sasCommunity.org team is thinking about different extensions to make it easier to login and also to edit, etc.

Are you familiar with any authorization extensions that might help?

Also: do you recommend any other extensions?

thank you very much for all you do on the site! --LainieH (talk) 11:35, 28 March 2014 (CDT)

I understand that there is an OpenID extension for user authentication. However, I haven't used OpenID, so I cannot give an opinion on the user experience. Personally, I find the existing standard mediawiki login system satisfactory and fail to understand why you would want to make logging in much easier. Then again I work in an environment where I am asked to authenticate my user identity each time I start an application that can access the more sensitive corporate data held and I also must reauthenticate my user identity for that application if I have left it idle for a time. Being able to log on and tick the "remember me for 30 days" box means Mediawiki websites are some of the easier websites to log on to. Even my e-mail providers require more frequent reconfirmation of my user identity. I think the trick is to NOT log off when you leave. Then, even if you shut down the browser/computer, the log-on cookie remains in the cache to be used the next time you visit. - Cameron (talk) 16:31, 28 March 2014 (CDT)
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. --Otterm1 (talk) 17:30, 28 March 2014 (CDT)

Cameron, Keep up the good work; you are a great contributor, editor, and example to all. -- Charlie Shipp (talk) 08:15, 24 May 2014 (CDT)

Participation in "Papers & Presentations"

Cameron, Thanks for your assistance on my page. I made one slight edit to move a title over to a major contributor to sasCommunity.org even though this person's Papers & Presentation page is yet to be initialized and filled in. Thanks Again, Charlie Shipp (talk) 21:06, 27 May 2014 (CDT) PS: Perhaps my minor action will be a motivation to create the new page.

Not a problem. - Cameron (talk) 07:32, 28 May 2014 (CDT)

Double thanks for helping with several of my articles and paper pages. Your expertise is much appreciated. --Art Carpenter (talk) 21:25, 22 January 2015 (CST)

You're welcome. Most of what I am doing is simply basic wiki maintenance ... i.e. Gardening. - Cameron (talk) 02:11, 23 January 2015 (CST)
Congratulations again on winning the 2015 Green Thumb (Gardening) Award! -- Charlie Shipp (talk) 19:44, 3 May 2015 (CDT)

Personal e-mails and SGF 2015 Reflections

Cameron, if we were to discuss an aspect of sasCommunity.org via personal eMail, would you be agreeable? My ID is Charles_Edwin_Shipp@gMail.com and Thanks-In-Advance:

If you want to send me a personal e-mail you can always e-mail me via the website. I am agreeable to receiving personal emails and perhaps replying to them. However, I am not sure why anyone should want to communicate with me privately about most aspects of sasCommunity.org because a public discussion would normally be a more transparent way of dealing with things on a wiki. Except when the issue involves sensitive or personal information that should remain private and confidential, if you feel you cannot hold a discussion about some aspect of the sasCommunity.org wiki in public then is it ethical to be discussing it at all? - Cameron (talk) 21:32, 4 May 2015 (CDT)

Regarding the new page SGF_2015_Reflections I've already spoken to Don Henderson and a few others, but would like your thoughts. -- Charlie Shipp (talk) 19:55, 3 May 2015 (CDT)

I think the best place to discuss the page SGF_2015_Reflections is at Talk:SGF_2015_Reflections, or else on the author's talk page. - Cameron (talk) 21:32, 4 May 2015 (CDT)

Green Thumb Award

Cameron, As Charlie has already beat me to the punch on the Green Thumb Award, I thought that I would give you some details. This year the sasCommunity Advisory Board created an award for site gardening. Hopefully it will be an annual award to be given at the Online Meetup at SAS Global Forum for outstanding gardening efforts on the site. You were unanimously selected and the award was announced at the Online Meetup. A more public announcement will be made on the site's Main Page, but we wanted to let you know first. Thank you for your efforts towards site maintenance. --Art Carpenter (talk) 22:55, 3 May 2015 (CDT)

Thanks, I am honoured that you think my humble efforts are worthy of this award! - Cameron (talk) 21:35, 4 May 2015 (CDT)

Table of contents templates

I've created a Dictionary page, which I feel to be useful at least to myself. I'm trying to get Template:Horizontal table of contents to work, so you can quickly navigate to a letter. It's based on the Wikipedia version. I'm not sure why it doesn't work. Any ideas? - paulkaefer (talk) 11:52, 16 May 2016 (CDT)

I suspect that Wikipedia uses a few wiki extensions that are not available on the sasCommunity wiki. - Cameron (talk) 20:31, 16 May 2016 (CDT)
I made an improvised version which will work at least for now. - paulkaefer (talk) 15:32, 16 May 2016 (CDT)

recent spam influx

Hi Cameron. As you may have noticed, there's been a recent influx of spam. Seems worse than I've seen on this site since I've joined. So I've added all of it up to this point to Category:Remove. I've reached out to Art, who's removed some of it, and am throwing around ideas for what we could do automatically. I wonder if something mentioned on this MediaWiki Spam Filter page would help.

In the meantime / anyway, I'm curious from your experience, as I've seen you flag a bunch of spam. Should we make templates like {{spam}} and {{spam user}}, like we did with {{work in progress}} and {{expired}} that could include the removal category, as well as some information to users who stumble on the page before it is deleted? So it could have a warning (in bold/red/large font) at the top saying this page is recognized to be spam, and having a link back to the homepage?

What are your thoughts? I think some form of auto-protection would be best, but this would at least help if users see the spammy pages. = paulkaefer (talk) 11:02, 19 October 2017 (CDT)

I prefer not to label content that you refer to as spam with that word, but rather consider it a form of inappropriate content. Posting such content is a breach of the Terms of Use. As such it should be treated no differently than any other inappropriate content - it gets removed - promptly. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, most users that post such inappropriate content create a new page to do so. Removal is relatively straight forward and can be accomplished by simply blanking the page. Content that is embedded in an existing page is perhaps harder to deal with. Although you can undo the edit, the inappropriate content remains in the page history, so removing it entirely requires a selective removal of the specific edits, which is a lot harder than removing the whole page.
Also, adding a notice and the removal category is more for the convenience of the site administrators so that they can subsequently find the page and remove it. While adding a polite notice to inform users of what has happened to the page content and explains why the content is removed is also a courtesy to the readers. However, I think this may discourage people who abuse their ability to post content freely on this website. I notice that we do not seem to get a lot of repeat business once the inappropriate content is removed and the inappropriateness of their offending behavior is explained to the offending users concerned. Posting inappropriate content is far more benign than some other disruptive behaviours I have observed on other wiki websites.
While some template text already exists but I am not sure a formal template is needed just for spam. I have found the template text a good starting point but it often needs to be adapted for different situations. Since the page is going to be removed in a few days, I would suggest something really generic, like {{not wanted}} which basically indicates the page is no longer wanted and can be removed. The text could say This page is not wanted and will be removed soon. Sort of the opposite of the Wanted Pages. - Cameron (talk) 21:15, 1 December 2017 (CST)