Jump to content

User talk:Bkonrad/Archive 44

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 40←Archive 42Archive 43Archive 44Archive 45Archive 46→Archive 50

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

May 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The May 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
.--Kumioko (talk) 01:53, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

Lizard King

good morning from Haarlem (the Netherlands) Yesterday I added info about Mike Plumb aka Lizard King. Mike is a professional skateboarder and as such he is know world wide in the skateboard world. I would not know of him except that my son is a skateboarder and coached mike since he was a little kid

But you took away my information. Can you advise me please, did I do something "wrong"?? thanks margaret —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dutchess0909 (talk • contribs) 06:20, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

There is no Wikipedia article about the person and the redlink did not meet the criteria for inclusion on disambiguation page at WP:DABRL. If the person is in fact notable (see WP:Notability), then I suggest creating a stub article with appropriate references for the person. older ≠ wiser 19:14, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Lower Peninsula of Michigan: Trolls

BK, I have to disagree with your revert of my removal of the Troll reference on the Lower Peninsula of Michigan of page. The source for the Troll reference is a fictional work, "A Thousand Bones", which itself has no references to verifiable fact sources. I probably shouldn't have used the term 'derogatory' as part of my reason for removing the material. Thanks, Bamyers99 (talk) 02:19, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

It illustrates conventional usage. It might be possible to find better quality sources, but there is little question that the usage has some currency. older ≠ wiser 02:22, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Conventional usage by who? I have lived in the Lower Peninsula for 49 years and have never heard the term used. It is doubtful that anybody outside of the Upper Peninsula has heard the term used. Bamyers99 (talk) 16:10, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Personal experience is a poor guide to verifiability. I think I learned of the troll usage quite soon after moving to Michigan. older ≠ wiser 17:04, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
FWIW, I know it to be a colloquial expression used in both peninsulas. e.g., Zazzle coaster; "North Troll webcam" from Kalkaska 7&6=thirteen (☎) 10:13, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

Asynchronous backtracking algorithm

Hello, Is the google scholar result page enough indication of potential for encyclopedic content ? I'm sorry I didn't develop further the article, I just met the "ABT" acronym while reading some computer science article like it was something obvious (but not to me) so I did some research and realize this acronym was not listed on Wikipedia so I added it. Can I put it back on ABT ? Léna (talk) 09:55, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The search results are a start, but that there is nothing relevant in the linked article means there is little benefit to readers in adding to the disambiguation page. Disambiguation pages are primarily navigational aids to locate existing articles with content relevant to the ambiguous term. older ≠ wiser 13:05, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I don't have the same opinion concerning disambiguation pages : I think they're also useful for readers who'd like to know what an acronym means (but the Wiktionnary might be better for this goal) and for contributors to know what are the articles to create (like the Special:WantedPages :)). But I've had a look at Wikipedia:Disambiguation dos and don'ts and seen it's a strong politic of en-wikipedia, so it's ok for me :) Léna (talk) 14:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Out of process deletion

Your deletion of Alkalai City was out of process and unwarranted. When deleting an article, when no one has complained about it, the least you could do was figure out what the basis of its creation was. You would have seen that an editor in good standing had created it, and if you would have looked at the history of the redirect target you would have seen that edits showing the relationship were well sourced. Instead, you shot first and didn't bother with the questions. Actions like that are an abuse of administrative privileges and leave all admins in a poor state of respect around here. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 15:30, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't agree, but really don't care enough about it. There is no history associated for the redirect and whatever the historical state of an article might have been is pretty much irrelevant if editors later decide to remove the information. IMO, it is a disservice to readers to redirect them to an article that contains no information whatsoever about the term. older ≠ wiser 15:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Taking it upon yourself to use admin powers, rather than nominating the redirect for deletion like mere mortals would do amounts to hubris, whether you agree or not with whether the redirect should go, there is NO speedy criteria on which to base your deletion, so it was out of process. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Whatever. If you want to whine about the deletion of your precious redirect, please take it somewhere else. The redirect is at most trivial in any case. older ≠ wiser 19:41, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Request for comment

This message is being sent to you because you have previously edited the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) page. There is currently a discussion that may result in a significant change to Wikipedia policy. Specifically, a consensus is being sought on if the policies of WP:UCN and WP:EN continues to be working policies for naming biographical articles, or if such policies have been replaced by a new status quo. This discussion is on-going at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English), and your comments would be appreciated. Dolovis (talk) 17:31, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

question about deleted edit

Hi, I'm wondering why you deleted my edit of the Morley disambiguation page, which added the well-known singer/songwriter Morley to the list of other Morleys. This Morley has three professional albums and several global tours and awards to her credit, so is surely as worthy of inclusion on the page as the fictional cigarette company and other Morleys that have not been deleted. Perhaps the problem was the external link I included to her website? But I wasn't sure how else to verify my entry, since citations are important to Wikipedia to validate the information. Should I instead have linked to the New York Times articles or TED presentations or Dave Matthews performances or other public press in which she has appeared? Thank you in advance for your help in clarifying this matter, as I am new to Wikipedia. Best wishes, Kristen Waterfallsong (talk) 19:54, 23 May 2011 (UTC)waterfallsongWaterfallsong (talk) 19:54, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

There does not appear to be any existing Wikipedia article about the subject you added and disambiguation pages are meant for helping readers find Wikipedia articles. They are not general indexes to the Internet and should not include either references or external links. Please see WP:Disambiguation and WP:MOSDAB for more information about appropriate uses of disambiguation pages. If the subject is notable, you can create a Wikipedia article for them. If you need help in creating the article, you might be able to request help at Wikipedia:Articles for creation or Wikipedia:Requested articles. older ≠ wiser 20:02, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

Extraterrestrial Biological Entity

I think that there are grounds for the inclusion of an article on 'Extraterrestrial Biological Entities' or 'EBEs' on Wikipedia and would dispute the redirection of the article to 'Extraterrestrial life' as there are no details here on EBEs. There is enough on EBEs in the mainstream press to warrant an article. Granted, the article that previously existed was insufficient but I believe its possible to create a decent article here.

Douusskamika (talk) 18:18, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Provide reliable sources then. A Youtube video is not that. Personally, deletion would have been my preferred choice, but I decided to go along with the decision of the previous AfD discussion. older ≠ wiser 20:02, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

Please review your edit [1] you are inappropriately adding redlinks in violation of DAB. Active Banana (bananaphone 17:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Exactly how is it in violation of "DAB"? I am by the way quite familiar with both WP:DAB and WP:MOSDAB, and in particular WP:DABRL. older ≠ wiser 17:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
"Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link; including more than one link can confuse the reader." (emph added) Active Banana (bananaphone 17:21, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
In particular, adding a redlinked Virgin Islands (disambiguation) when a blue link Virgin Islands (disambiguation) is particulary incompatible with the purpose of DAB pages. Active Banana (bananaphone 17:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Re first point, my edit does have exactly one blue-link. Re second point, I don't understand what you are talking about -- there is no redlinked Virgin Islands (disambiguation) on the page. older ≠ wiser 17:25, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
for some reason when I am looking at the page, the Virgin Islands (disambiguation) shows up as a red link. sorry for the confusion. Active Banana (bananaphone 17:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

June 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The June 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 17:17, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

America Hoffman

The claim that his name begins with a lowercase "a" is unsourced. I strongly suspect that it is a hoax, and have been working to remove these statements.

Moreover, even if you can find a reliable source to confirm that his name is "america", I still argue that it's wrong to change it as you did, particularly at the beginning of a sentence. See also Talk:America Hoffman. — Smjg (talk) 19:10, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

On the one hand, a little assumption of good faith goes a long ways, certainly before making bizarre edit summaries about "disobedience" as if your edits merit obedience. Given Abie Hoffman's biography, the notion that he gave his son an unusual name is not in the least suspect. A little bit of sleuthing would have turned up evidence. For example, Abbie Hoffman: American Rebel p 224 and used in lower case form in Soon to be a major motion picture p 303, For the Hell of It: The Life and Times of Abbie Hoffman p vii, Run Run Run: The Lives of Abbie Hoffman p 208.
But on the other hand, it is a valid point that regardless of how the name may have been stylized, there is no necessity that Wikipedia has to observe that stylization. Other reputable publications (such as the NYT) do not. older ≠ wiser 20:58, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the source. But I am made to wonder how it took so long to find one despite the length of time the claim was there. But still, when something in a WP article is disputed, it's only right to refer to/participate in the talk page discussion rather than just change it to the way you think it should be. Anyway, now that the page has been closed as a redirect and a source has been found, I guess we can let the issue lie now. — Smjg (talk) 20:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

Ellie

Hi Bkonrad--

I reverted your removal of unnecessary info at the "Ellie" disambiguation page, simply because there is no article or stub for the Calder "Elephant" design. And I don't have any source for starting one. I've seen the "Ellie" logo many times, and had always wondered about its origin and significance. So that's the only reason I put the extraneous info where I did. I still don't have a date or any further information about the design, or why it was chosen for the award. Milkunderwood (talk) 20:04, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

In general, there should only be one link per entry on a disambiguation page. The award statuette is mentioned in the National Magazine Awards article which was already linked. That article also mentions and links to the artist Alexander Calder. However, neither of the two articles that you added links to (stabile and Alexander Calder) even so much as mention the award. For a reader looking for information about the award, neither link is helpful. older ≠ wiser 20:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
OK Milkunderwood (talk) 23:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Athletics and the NCAA

I see you do a lot of WP work on Michigan topics. I too am from Michigan. It baffles me how we could both be from Michigan (and/or love Michigan), and not see eye to eye on the subject of athletics. Usage of the word "athletics" as a general term is ubiquitous in Michigan. Title IX affects every university, college, high school, middle school and elementary school in Michigan, and mandates "gender equality in athletics." The NCAA governs multitudes of athletics programs like basketball, baseball, softball, soccer, & football U of M, MSU, CMU, WMU, EMU, GVSU, NMU, etc. The NCAA is like a big, blinking neon light in good old Michigan, and athletics programs are what people talk about (well, that and the weather). I am sheerly baffled as to how you could not understand "athletics" as a general term used repeatedly in everyday life in Michigan. TommyKirchhoff (talk) 14:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

See my recent comment at Talk:Athletics. It is not that I don't understand, I simply don't agree that there is a primary topic. older ≠ wiser 14:06, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
I left you a link there :) TommyKirchhoff (talk) 14:15, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

US National Archives collaboration

 United States National Archives WikiProject
Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created WP:NARA to launch these efforts.

There are all sorts of tasks available for any type of editor, whether you're a writer, organizer, gnome, coder, or image guru. The National Archives is making its resources available to Wikipedia, so help us forge this important relationship! Please sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Removed post at village pump

I was actually in the process of redacting that person's comment with the phone number you removed. One thing I noticed that is still there is the phone number in the edit summary of the deleted revision. Are you able to remove that? Ryan Vesey (talk) 15:06, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Good catch. I didn't notice the edit summary. I just changed the visibility of that also. Thanks. older ≠ wiser 15:13, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
No problem, you are an admin right? I found nothing on your userpage saying so, but I'm fairly certain changing revision history is an administrator tool. Ryan Vesey (talk) 15:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Yup. I guess I'm old school in that I think being an admin is no big deal and I certainly don't think admins should be accorded any special treatment, which is why I don't make a point of advertising. But I do appreciate that some admins do highlight the fact in order to let people know that they are available to fix things non-admin editors might not be able to. I don't do a lot of admin work apart from the occasional page deletions and edit history merges associated with page moves -- but when I come across blatant violations, I will block users or edit revision history. older ≠ wiser 15:24, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

AfD

I plan to nominate Notre Dame, Indiana for deletion. If its existence itself is not verified WP is probably better off without an article. BigJim707 (talk) 00:20, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Pentagram map‎

Please take a look at this and at the contribs). I believe this new editor needs all the encouragement we can give. Now somebody is raising an alleged "conflict" issue, which is just the latest in a series of wikipedia misadventures. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:34, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bkonrad/Archive_44&oldid=1091495626"