Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Slovakia/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Banner

We need to add this banner {{WikiProject Slovakia}} to as many talk pages related to Slovakia as possible. It will bring participants interested in the topic. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 14:43, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Already in progress; I'm cruising around town articles, fixing them as necessary, and adding banners. I've also thought if adding "rating" feature could be done, though it isn't necessary right now I suppose as most would be still Start or stubs. Or is it? MarkBA ^t/c/@ 15:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

That would be nice, I already added this feature request on WikiProject Czech Republic, because I don't know how to do it properly. If you can, please add it. Rating and priority. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 15:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've imported code from the WP:BANGLADESH project (sorry!) with two parameters, class and importance. I've done mini-testing on my sandbox and one short real, and it looks like it works properly, though I'd like to hear your opinion about it and to tell me if anything else (e.g. another parameter) is needed, though I think for a start this is enough.MarkBA ^t/c/@ 16:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

As I got no reply, I assume you agree with the way how I done it, so I may start when two things will be settled: to create assessment page and categories and to define importance criteria. My opinion is: Top should be reserved for Slovakia, language and linking articles (... of/in Slovakia) + Bratislava, High for important topics (Great Moravia, KoH, Czechoslovakia etc., regions, bigger cities (regional, 50.000 or 30.000?), notable natural features, some biographies (e.g. Štefánik, Štúr, Prime ministers, presidents etc.), Mid for less important topics (all other towns, districts, other biographies of some importance, maybe few castles for example, some other natural features) and Low for everything else. It's not everything but these are few areas that I think should be defined. MarkBA ^t/c/@ 20:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for outlining these clear and sensible guidelines. I would perhaps move the World Heritage objects to the High importance category. What do you think? Tankred (talk) 05:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think it is sensible. So the World Heritage sites will be exception to this rule if used (e.g. Vlkolínec or Banská Štavnica would be High instead of low or medium.) Should be caves in the Slovak Karst included or only the Slovak Karst article? Other should be solved as well: should be objects around Spiš Castle itself be included in the exception and what about the primeval forests of the East Carpathians? And I don't know what should be general limit for including towns in the High importance (provisionally 50,000, Germany for example gives 100,000, what I would "translate" here to around 30,000). Of course the criteria may change over time, but if we'll sort out these issues I may re-work assessment table to reflect results). MarkBA ^t/c/@ 06:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and we should decide how many articles should be in the Top category. I would say 25, max. 30 should be enough. Though, I will probably have bit harder time when I'll come across structure articles (e.g. a different category is for, say, New Bridge or St. Martin's Cathedral than to some local church or maybe stadium). MarkBA ^t/c/@ 13:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Giving it a second thought, I think only Banska Stiavnica is important enough to be in the High category and the rest of the World Heritage sites probably should be in the Mid category. Only the articles specifically describing a World Heritage site should be included. I think it is Vihorlat in the case of primeval forests. I am not sure about the caves because only some of them (not the whole national park) is on the list. We should check Unesco's website. I like your criteria for the top category, but I would perhaps make them slightly more precise: Slovakia, Slovaks, Slovak language, Bratislava and comprehensive articles "... of/in Slovakia" (e.g. Politics of Slovakia, but not Flag of Slovakia or Skiing in Slovakia). I would put all the state symbols (flag, anthem, etc.) into the High category. I think the threshold of 50,000 inhabitants (i.e. all the "cities") is a reasonable criterion for cities and towns ranked as of High priority. But I would also add Banska Stiavnica (because of its historical importance) and Piestany (because of the size combined with their status of the most important spa town). I think we should make the article about the current prime minister a High priority article (because it is the most important position in Slovakia's political system), but we should decrease it automatically to Mid after he is out of the office and then give the High priority to the new prime minister. I would do the same with the current president, but this time moving from Mid to Low. Constitution of Slovakia, National Council of the Slovak Republic, and perhaps also Slovak koruna should be of High priority too. I think it is a good idea to give the Mid priority to articles about the most important buildings (e.g. Bojnice Castle, St. Martin Concathedral). Any comments? Tankred (talk) 16:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Probably WP:Germany assessment page can give us some help. For Banská Štiavnica and Piešťany, they are too famous to be in Mid so I think they should be High (and as such are two exceptions to the 50,000 rule). For famous structures as you mentioned plus other which I think should be considered case by case, should be Mid, other Low. For the politics matter, I see your logic that current prime ministers and presidents should have one rating higher, but for president I'd keep mid, rather than low. If we'll ever start writing about ministers (I've seen some), these should be Low. And I'm coming to another question, what about parties? I think: current coalition and opposition mid, other low (and so could do with leaders). Yes, we could discuss these "trivial" topics over and over, but best to agree now than to have dispute later. For UNESCO sites, after all, it's sensible to keep in mid, except for B. Štiavnica.

So let's recapitulate criteria for Top: Slovakia, Slovaks, language, "...of/in Slovakia" (but I only partly understand why state symbols should be High, well, never mind...), with only main topics being Top (e.g. that's Tourism in Slovakia but not Skiing, Politics but not Constitution and National Council or Economy but not koruna). And where should be WWII Slovak Republic categorised? I think High or possibly Mid, though, the formulations given in the link should help categorising articles. And lastly for now, natural features; In High, should be given: (possibly) Danube, Váh, maybe Hron, Tatras, High Tatras, Low Tatras, both Fatras (possibly) and Slovenské rudohorie + Gerlachov Peak. Partly notable should be in Mid (that's Tribeč, Little Carpathians or Slanské vrchy + Hornád and Ipeľ plus some other cases what I mean) and everything else Low. So let's hope we'll agree on what should be were and we can begin. MarkBA ^t/c/@ 17:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with everything, but I would perhaps put Slovak Paradise and Slovak Karst to the High category and Slovenske Rudohorie to the Mid one. I am not sure if Slanske vrchy and Tribec are notable enough to be in the Mid category. I think Hron should be in the Mid category (because it is not navigable and much less important economically than Vah) and Danube in the High category. I do not know how to categorize WWII Slovak Republic. I would perhaps put it into the High category together with Slovak National Uprising and Velvet Revolution. But I have no strong feelings about it. What are we going to do with Velvet divorce and Prague Spring? Any thoughts? And what about Alexander Dubcek, Gustav Husak, and Milan Hodza? Tankred (talk) 17:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, looks like I didn't quite hit the mark but basically I agree. From rivers only Danube and Váh should be High (I don't know if Tisza can be considered as well, maybe Mid). Depending on the length and such-like, examples for Mid should be Morava, (maybe) Little Danube, Hron, Ipeľ and Hornád and all everything else Low. For the Republic maybe High, for the events mentioned I'm torn; either High or Mid. Biographies are bit more difficult, only truly notable ones should be high, and for me only Dubček is good enough for High, the other two for mid. Probably we should consider when we'll come across, for example Štúr is good for High but Hurban is not. MarkBA ^t/c/@ 17:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

So if there's nothing more than this, I think basic rules are more or less drafted, for now. If you have better examples like the ones on the Assessment page, feel free to replace them. MarkBA ^t/c/@ 22:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if we should setup User:AlexNewArtBot for new articles and User:WP 1.0 bot for assessments and suchlike. It could be useful, but I don't know exactly how to do that. MarkBA ^t/c/@ 14:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Although I am a big fan of bots (if they do not want to sell me anything:-), I would not use them to assess articles. Perhaps only to mark stubs, but nothing else. In some tasks, I rather trust human intelligence. Anyway, I have no idea how to setup bots, so I cannot be of much help here. Tankred (talk) 16:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

No, I meant for reporting ratings and such, but the second one isn't needed to setup as that User:WP 1.0 bot has already noticed and reports ratings. For the former the instructions are here but I don't understand them completely (mainly the 3rd step). MarkBA ^t/c/@ 16:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure with the importance category. There are two ways - first, the articles should be ranked with its real importance (big city = big importance, little city = low importance). Second, the articles should be ranked with its requirements. E.g. I marked Prague as low importance, because it is well written article and long enough, so we don't need to look at it so frequently. Hard to say which one we should choose. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 15:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've seen most projects using the former way. For the latter I don't know about any special marking but it's possible to add comments or to mark articles as needing attention, if the required parameter is present. Personally I would use the first one, because I can't well imagine marking Prague as Low and, say, some village with High or Top. MarkBA ^t/c/@ 16:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone know how to cross-tabulate the quality and priority scales? I mean, it would be useful to have a list of the top or high importance articles that are just stubs or starts. Tankred (talk) 21:10, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm afraid I can't help you with this one, I'm sorry.

Slovakia articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA			2	2			4
FL		1		1			2
GA		3	5	17		1	26
B	7	26	35	47		9	124
C	6	30	73	194		61	364
Start	9	86	338	1,237		350	2,020
Stub	2	15	339	6,209		962	7,527
List	1	7	13	169	25	74	289
Category					5,742		5,742
Disambig					17		17
File					69		69
Portal					1		1
Project					7		7
Template					446		446
NA	1	2	7	52	219		281
Other					23		23
Assessed	26	170	812	7,928	6,549	1,457	16,942
Unassessed				1		18	19
Total	26	170	812	7,929	6,549	1,475	16,961
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 57,142			Ω = 5.68

I haven't seen that anywhere and so I don't know how to even create a list like that one. All I can do is to have this simple "counter" which however doesn't indicate any articles which need attention. MarkBA ^t/c/@ 21:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Pity. Anyway, I will at least move the counter to the main page, so we have some idea about how we are doing here. Tankred (talk) 05:14, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

The stats table seems to be out of date. There is only one GA article listed in the table and other numbers are not updated either. Any thoughts how this can be fixed? Tankred (talk) 00:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I've already asked that one and got a reply that User:WP 1.0 bot has had some glitches recently and couldn't update properly. It should get today or soon to ours, as it is under "sh" as I'm writing now. MarkBA ^{what's up?/my mess} 06:30, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I have found we can cross-tabulate the quality and priority scales. Sort of. It is easy to identify top- or high-priority articles that are still stubs or starts using Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Slovakia_articles_by_quality/1. Tankred (talk) 06:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Cotini

I read this article and its says: "They were probably identical or constituted a significant part of the archaeological Púchov culture, with the center in Havránok." According to Szabó Miklós, this can't be true. So you should mention that there are other opinions in this matter too. Cotini celts also lived in northern Hungary. Near my hometown (Miskolc) they had a fortificated village (its not decided it can say oppidum-- the place called Nagysánc), and near Sajópetrii they had a forging village. There are cotini findigs, coins in the museum of miskolc (Hermann Otto Museum). As i know, the cotini tribe was located beetween osii and anartii tribes. They probably arriwed here with the boii, around 400BC. After Burepista dacian invasion they was taken dacian cultural elements. They started to give dacian names. Your article is very good, thaks, i was happy when i find it. Sorry for my bad english. user: Derszu 13:38, 31 December 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Derszu (talk • contribs) 13:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Tulkolahten wishes Merry Christmas to all participants! :)