User:Ned Scott

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


While I try to keep up to date with discussions I'm in, it's very possible for me to miss something. For this reason or any other, feel free to send me an extra poke via e-mail or AIM, for anything, trivial or important (or to just say hi).
Help track images! User:Splarka/watchimages.js Cut and paste the script into Special:Mypage/monobook.js, and you'll get a link in the toolbox (on the side bar) that lets you add all images included in an article to your watchlist. Changes to the image description page, new uploaded versions, and deletions will be displayed on your watchlist.
Wikipedia
en This user is a native speaker of English.
AF This user can make high quality audio files.
{{t|c}} This user can use and program conditional templates.
Mixer-icon.jpg This user is an audio engineer.
WikiProjects
DIGI This user is a member of the Digimon work group.
Wikipe-tan head.png This user is a participant of WikiProject Anime and Manga.
Wikiproject:Television This user is a participant of WikiProject Television.
The WikiProject Council logo This editor participates in the WikiProject Council.
Miyajima-Torii-Modified.jpg This user is a participant in
WikiProject Japan.
Gamepad.svg This user is a member of
WikiProject Video games.
Stargate-color.png This user is a member of the
Stargate WikiProject.
Schwarzbeck UHALP 9108 A.jpg This user is a member of the B.E.a.T. Taskforce.
Definition of Free Cultural Works logo notext.svg This user is a member of WikiProject Free images.
Text-x-generic.svg This user is a participant of WikiProject Lists.
Graduation hat.svg This user is a member of WikiProject Classroom coordination.
Technical
Power Mac G5.jpg This user edits/views Wikipedia with a Power Mac G5 (10.5), a MacBook Pro(10.6, W 7) and an iPod touch)

sfri This user contributes using Safari.
Mozilla Firefox logo 2013.svg This user contributes using Firefox.

I am User:Ned Scott on all Wikimedia Projects with the exception of wikinews:es:User:Ned Scott. I'm in my late-twenties and live in Arizona, USA. My main focus on Wikipedia is working on articles about entertainment and fiction (particularly anime and science fiction, which is probably not a big surprise), though I do enjoy working on much more than just those kinds of articles. Lately I've been more active in meta space than in article space, focusing on discussions and technical features such as templates. I'm also very interested in applying some of the methodology of Wikipedia to other wikis around the internet, which lead me to start up WikiProject Transwiki.

Unfortunately my personal time is being consumed by some other stuff lately, and I'm not nearly as active as I once was. Don't let that stop you from leaving me a message or asking for assistance if you feel I can be of some help! I will always be a Wikipedian, and look forward to always having at least some level of contribution to this great project. I also plan on getting more active again to at least finish a number of projects/ideas that I've either had or was involved in.

Useful links


List templates

Projects

Transwiki

  • User:Ned Scott/transwiki - A rough rough draft and collection of thoughts for guidelines and advice about transwiking articles.

External contact project

Lets you find users who have external contact info. For use with WP:CATSCAN

Discussion tracking

Centralized discussion
Proposals Discussions Recurring proposals

Note: inactive discussions, closed or not, should be archived.
Notice Fiction/entertainment guideline notices
More issues and discussions at the fiction notice board
Delsort
Delsort categories
RfC/General notice
XfDs
Other


Village pump sections
Policy
post | watch | search

To discuss existing and proposed policies

Technical
post | watch | search

To discuss technical issues. For wiki software bug reports use MediaZilla

Proposals (persistent)
post | watch | search

To discuss new proposals that are not policy related. See also: perennial proposals.

Assistance
post | watch | search

To post requests for assistance not covered by the Help desk or the Reference desk

Miscellaneous
post | watch | search

To post messages that do not fit into any other category


RfCs - Art, architecture, literature and media

Talk:The Zeitgeist Movement

Should the material sourced to Goldberg's article be edited to note the linkage between the movement and what she is saying about the movie?

Survey

  • Yes The material in question was copied from the movie article with no changes. As such, the material says many things about the movie but does not indicate a direct connection to any specific criticism of the movement. If the source makes a connection then that connection should be noted in this article within reason. Best practice would be to start from scratch in writing material based off the Goldberg source rather than trying to fashion material originally written about the movie into material about the movement.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 21:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Steven Emerson

Do you support or oppose the above proposed merger of Investigative Project on Terrorism with Steven Emerson and Why?Serialjoepsycho (talk) 07:28, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Free! (anime)

What should be the title of this page: Free! or Free! (anime)? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:20, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Lana Del Ray (album)

I realize that I requested that this article be moved not too long ago, so before I jump the gun with any further proposals, I'd just like to start an informal discussion first. As far as I can tell, there is nothing that would indicate that this record is titled just Lana Del Ray; Idolator, MTV, The New York Times, Rolling Stone, and Vanity Fair all call the project by the extended title Lana Del Ray A.K.A. Lizzy Grant. I would like to reach a consensus as to what the correct title of the record is, and from there take any further action as necessary. WikiRedactor (talk) 22:20, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Black Sabbath (album)

[Moved from above; "this" refers to Talk:Black_Sabbath_(album)#Genres. Drmies (talk) 18:31, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Damaged Lady

Note:Starting on a specific relevant article page, may need a further RFC with a refined question on some China/Korea/Japan or Song or Title guideline page after wards depending on progress. Question 1 regarding English approximations of Korean Japanese Chinese titles: Should Korean, Japanese and Chinese, songs and albums where (condition 1) a clear English title is not used on cover artwork, and (condition 2) translated English versions only can be found in html sources, blogs and listings, and not consistently in English printed books, be considered an exception to WP:MUSIC title guidelines which are designed for songs and albums where a clear Latin-alphabet (e.g. English, Spanish, French) title exists, and defer to the policy objectives of WP:CRITERIA which requires recognizability and as a result in all cases base names (e.g. Damaged Lady) should redirect to a recognizable title giving artist name such as Damaged Lady (Kara song) or Can't Be A Lady (Kara song) (technically this is possible: see Harusame which redirects to Japanese destroyer Harusame (1937)). Question 2 regarding Latin-script romanizations of Korean Japanese Chinese titles: Likewise in all cases where a song or album title is a romanization from Korean hangul, Japanese script or Chinese hanzi, then again base names should redirect to a recognizable title giving artist name, e.g. Sugnyeo ga mos dwae (Kara song). The reason why this would be more needed for romanization of Korean, romanization of Japanese, romanization of Chinese is that in all 3 languages there are multiple schemes and in Japanese and Chinese schemes a loss of the meaning given by ideograms. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:33, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox person

Should a person's agency be listed in the infobox? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:26, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Kenji Miyazawa

This figure was a member of the religio-political group Kokuchūkai, which was founded by the nationalist Chigaku Tanaka. Very few sources independently refer to Kenji as a nationalist. Should the article refer to him as a nationalist? 182.249.240.43 (talk) 02:07, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Draft talk:Half-Life 3

Until now Half-Life 3 has only been written about on the Half-Life (series) article. As a game which hasn't been officially confirmed by Valve (creators of the series), arguments have been made that it should not yet have its own article per WP:CRYSTAL. This draft article has been created to test the waters and see if the large amount of coverage the potential game has had is enough to support its own article. An inconclusive discussion can be found at WikiProject Video Games. The question here is a fairly straightforward one: Should Half-Life 3 have its own article based on this draft, or should it remain in the series article? Sam Walton (talk) 08:31, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Violet (color)

 :For reference: version without the change vs version with the change PaleAqua (talk) 21:15, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Request board

This is a human-edited list of requests for comment. Click here to add a new request.


RFCs - Wikipedia style, referencing, layout and WikiProjects

Talk:Autism spectrum

A consensus was reached on Talk:Autism, that Wikipedia's style should favor the phrase "autistic person" rather than "person with autism". We apparently need an entirely separate consensus in cases where "person with autism..." is followed by "...spectrum disorder."
Support because people on the autism spectrum are autistic. That's why it's called the autism spectrum. The terms "autistic" and "on the spectrum" can be used interchangeably as they mean the same thing (aside: "on the spectrum" should be used less often as it is cumbersome). The DSM-5 does not recognize "classic" autism and ASD as separate diagnoses. Wikipedia should reflect the most current style guides and not use the language of outdated references, even if the content of the references is otherwise accurate. Muffinator (talk) 19:07, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Deaf culture

While it appears that there is consensus on this page to use the term "deaf person" as many deaf people consider being deaf one of the most important aspects of their being.

People with normal hearing do not see the fact that they can hear as one of the most important aspect of their being and thus "person with normal hearing" or "person with hearing" is better than "hearing person" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 18:37, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine

Is changing text from
  • "200 children without autism." to "200 allistic children" [1]
  • "normal individuals" to "neurotypical individuals" [2]
  • "matched controls" to "matched neurotypicals" [3]
  • They are also changing ASD to autism.

We have unfortunately lost the person who has written much of our autism content. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 03:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Article titles

In an effort to split an article, I am faced with the problem of which of the two articles after the split should be given the old well-known article title, where both of the new subjects could claim to have COMMONNAME and PRIMARY TOPIC arguments for the title depending on the demography group the reader and/or the editor belong, and would like to invite comments from wider editor-base on how to handle this article naming issue. Yiba (talk | contribs) 07:00, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

===Background

For the longest time, it was necessary to link dates (e.g. January 1, 1970) so the wiki software could format them automatically. Because this was often used in mainspace, it was desirable to keep those links blue and relevant, so four-digit number articles, by convention, are about years (if it existed, the corresponding natural number would be at 1970 (number)). Since people write about lots of different time periods on Wikipedia, this also extends to three-, two- and one-digit numbers (but not five and larger, because we are (apparently) not the Long Now Foundation); 5 is the year 5, not the number 5.

However, this linking is no longer necessary. We had a nice long edit war over whether it should still happen, of course, but I digress. Currently, fewer than 50 pages link to 5,[4] while many more link to its numerical counterpart.[5] One wonders whether the year is truly the primary topic for the numeral.

Question

Should we rename 1 through 99 to 1 AD through 99 AD (the precise naming scheme here is negotiable), then rename 1 (number) through 99 (number) to 1 through 99, and finally amend WP:NCNUM to account for the change?

NB: This intentionally only extends to one- and two-digit years, because larger numbers are less important while more recent years are more important. We may later revisit this discussion for three-digit years, but they are not part of this proposal. --NYKevin 21:51, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English)

When titling Wikipedia articles, should the Icelandic letters eth (ð) and thorn (þ) be used?

Please support one of the options below.

(Proposed by Formerip (talk) 13:45, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Request board

This is a human-edited list of requests for comment. Click here to add a new request.


RFCs - Wikipedia policies, guidelines and proposals

Wikipedia talk:Username policy

Should we issue warnings to users for their username who have never edited?

It has been drawn to my attention that the advice being offered in relation to improper usernames is unclear in whether we should be warning users ({{uw-username}}; {{uw-coi-username}}) for their username who have never made their first edit (e.g. [6] [7]). Suggested new wording to the top of Wikipedia:Username policy#Dealing with inappropriate usernames:

Consider leaving well alone

If the name is not unambiguously problematic, it may be sensible to ignore it. Assume good faith, and also note the exceptions in the section on inappropriate usernames. Generally, one should not ask a user to change their username unless the user has made at least one recent edit.

xenotalk 15:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Template talk:Cite doi

Following this discussion, Template:cite doi currently operates by searching the doi string against an individual template subpage within Category:Cite doi templates (each of which is simply a hardcoded {{cite journal}} citation). There are currently over 50k doi template subpages (more than 10% out of all templatespace) out of approximately 67 million doi in existence. Each citation is of very low (or no) usage. Should every subtemplate under Template:cite doi be substituted into each page as a cite journal citation? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:00, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:History of the Jews in Nepal

During the recent deletion discussion, many expressed discontent with the current title, including people arguing for deletion as well as people arguing for inclusion, specifically that the word 'history' was misleading in this case, that the article was more about Jews and Israelis in Nepal, and not about the history of the Jews in that land, which -- I think most agreed -- is unsubstantial, and limited to the past few decades. I think there is agreement that there is not a strong permanent presence of Jews in Nepal, although a strong tourist population as well as Jewish outreach organizations such as Chabad. It is likely that the term 'history' caused the deletion discussion to begin in the first place. User @Nyttend: proposed renaming or moving the article to Judaism in Nepal which seems, in my view, to accurately and succinctly describe the article. The question, then: should we change the article name to 'Judaism in Nepal'?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:30, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports)

Should we consider a rephrasing of the intro to WP:NSPORTS which clarifies that WP:NSPORTS is a useful guideline, but that WP:GNG is a superseding policy? If so, what might that phrasing be? KDS4444Talk 20:03, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Article titles

In an effort to split an article, I am faced with the problem of which of the two articles after the split should be given the old well-known article title, where both of the new subjects could claim to have COMMONNAME and PRIMARY TOPIC arguments for the title depending on the demography group the reader and/or the editor belong, and would like to invite comments from wider editor-base on how to handle this article naming issue. Yiba (talk | contribs) 07:00, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion

I think that TfD should be expanded to cover deletion/mergers/discussions/renames of [[module:]] namespace -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 01:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Signatures

This discussion was officially turned into an RfC on request 19:57, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

===Background

For the longest time, it was necessary to link dates (e.g. January 1, 1970) so the wiki software could format them automatically. Because this was often used in mainspace, it was desirable to keep those links blue and relevant, so four-digit number articles, by convention, are about years (if it existed, the corresponding natural number would be at 1970 (number)). Since people write about lots of different time periods on Wikipedia, this also extends to three-, two- and one-digit numbers (but not five and larger, because we are (apparently) not the Long Now Foundation); 5 is the year 5, not the number 5.

However, this linking is no longer necessary. We had a nice long edit war over whether it should still happen, of course, but I digress. Currently, fewer than 50 pages link to 5,[8] while many more link to its numerical counterpart.[9] One wonders whether the year is truly the primary topic for the numeral.

Question

Should we rename 1 through 99 to 1 AD through 99 AD (the precise naming scheme here is negotiable), then rename 1 (number) through 99 (number) to 1 through 99, and finally amend WP:NCNUM to account for the change?

NB: This intentionally only extends to one- and two-digit years, because larger numbers are less important while more recent years are more important. We may later revisit this discussion for three-digit years, but they are not part of this proposal. --NYKevin 21:51, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources

A number of editors have been asserting on thread at RS/N that Russia Today and the Voice of Russia, which are owned or operated by the government of Russia are not RS in an attempt to make a blanket dismissal of the source, preventing its use on Wikipedia for any purpose.

In light of the sprawling thread at the RS/N Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Russia_Today, which appears to involve a lot of contentious assertions not related to the Guideline, it seems that an RfC is needed to prevent the consensus building procedure at RS/N from being impeded for the same reasons.

Aside from the general section on News organizations, the section on Biased or opinionated sources

Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject. While a source may be biased, it may be reliable in the specific context. When dealing with a potentially biased source, editors should consider whether the source meets the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking.

the section on Context matters

The reliability of a source depends on context. Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made in the Wikipedia article and is an appropriate source for that content. In general, the more people engaged in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the writing, the more reliable the publication.

and the section on Questionable sources

Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, that are promotional in nature, or which rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions. Questionable sources are generally unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties, which includes claims against institutions, persons living or dead, as well as more ill-defined entities. The proper uses of a questionable source are very limited.

Biased or opinionated sources
Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject.
While a source may be biased, it may be reliable in the specific context. When dealing with a potentially biased source, editors should consider whether the source meets the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking.

would seem to be relevant passages from the Guideline to this RfC.

It has been established, for example, that RT has a well-established reputation for fact checking on a par with many RS news organizations, and the opposite having no editorial control, the claim is that they have excessive editorial control, making them biased.--Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 00:59, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Layout

The custom over the past several years is to put several stub templates on an article as a means of categorization. The reason for doing this made sense—people wanting to work on stubs having to do with Subject Matter X can look at the category for stubs in Subject Matter X, while said article would also be appealing to those working on articles in Subject Matter Y. But from the user experience point of view, it's a problematic proposition. Imagine going to an article and seeing:
This article is an X stub.
This article is a Y stub.
This article is a Z stub.

Why does it say the same thing three times? I already knew it was a stub when I read it was one the first time! I thus propose that articles are limited to one stub template per article. Using WikiProject templates on the talk page, we can sort articles into as many stub categories as we like. For the purposes of presentation, however, I think one template would suffice. (I would support further changes to the way we handle stubs on Wikipedia but let's just do one thing at a time.) Harej (talk) 01:16, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)

I am getting seriously tired of all the, to be extremely blunt, crappy articles about this or that college, that because of the near automatic presumption of notability are littering Wikipedia. It's becoming rare for me to get through a single page of new articles on NPP without running into one or more of them. They are often completely unsourced and highly promotional. Even the one's that do have some sources, are often so poor and or obviously promotional that they would get nuked in an AfD discussion if the topic was anything other than schools. WHY ARE SCHOOLS A SACRED COW ON WIKIPEDIA?

I am considering putting up a proposal to require that all schools and colleges be subject to the exact same standards as any other topic, specifically significant coverage in multiple reliable sources to be considered notable. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

 ;Background:
There has recently been some discussion on Wikipedia talk:Signatures#"Font" Deprecated? specifically about if "* Avoid deprecated markup such as the <font> tag." should be in the WP:SIGAPP section of our police on Wikipedia. Because of this disagreement, and based on a comment from that discussion by Redrose64, which I quote, the FONT element has been deprecated since at least HTML 4.01 (24 December 1999); in the present HTML 5 spec, it is marked as obsolete., I started doing some research as these elements have been deprecated nearly fifteen years now. Visiting https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/font the first thing I'm struck by is a big red box that says "Obsolete: This feature is obsolete. Although it may still work in some browsers, its use is discouraged since it could be removed at any time. Try to avoid using it.", reading just a little further down the page, there is a usage note that reads:

Do not use this element! Though once normalized in HTML 3.2, it was deprecated in HTML 4.01, at the same time as all elements related to styling only, then obsoleted in HTML5.

<basefont> has the same Do not use this element! warning. <acronym>, <big>, <dir>, <strike>, and <tt> also all have the big red box that says "Obsolete: This feature is obsolete. Although it may still work in some browsers, its use is discouraged since it could be removed at any time. Try to avoid using it." and even <center> has a big grey box that says "Deprecated: This feature has been removed from the Web. Though some browsers may still support it, it is in the process of being dropped. Do not use it in old or new projects. Pages or Web apps using it may break at any time." Heck, even w3schools has a big red warning that these tags are not supported or deprecated (example).
Question
Should we technically discourage new instances of these HTML elements that are "in the process of being dropped" by major browsers? 02:43, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources

Are newspaper headlines, in themselves, a "reliable source" as absolutely usable as the publication they appear in? 23:40, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Request board

This is a human-edited list of requests for comment. Click here to add a new request.

User sub-pages

Ned Scott Ned Scott/Editcounter Ned Scott/FICT
Ned Scott/FICT/Aug07 Ned Scott/FICT/Dec07 Ned Scott/FICT/Feb08
Ned Scott/FICT/July07 Ned Scott/FICT/June08 Ned Scott/FICT/March08
Ned Scott/FICT/Nov07 Ned Scott/Infobox Digimon character
Ned Scott/Navbox/core Ned Scott/Template:Track list
Ned Scott/Template:Wpp1 Ned Scott/User categories
Ned Scott/Wikipedians who use StatusBot Ned Scott/arbcom
Ned Scott/header
Ned Scott/monobook.css Ned Scott/monobook.js Ned Scott/recent update
Ned Scott/sandbox Ned Scott/sandbox2 Ned Scott/sandbox3
Ned Scott/sandbox4 Ned Scott/sandbox5 Ned Scott/sandbox6
Ned Scott/sandbox7 Ned Scott/sandbox8 Ned Scott/subpage
Ned Scott/transwiki Ned Scott/unicode Ned Scott/watchlists
Ned Scott/watchlists/all Ned Scott/watchlists/arbcom Ned Scott/watchlists/fiction guidelines

User talk sub-pages

Ned Scott Ned Scott/Archive 13 Ned Scott/Archive 14
Ned Scott/Archive 15 Ned Scott/Archive 16 Ned Scott/Infobox Digimon character
Ned Scott/archive
Ned Scott/archive1 Ned Scott/archive10
Ned Scott/archive11 Ned Scott/archive12 Ned Scott/archive2
Ned Scott/archive3 Ned Scott/archive4 Ned Scott/archive5
Ned Scott/archive6 Ned Scott/archive7 Ned Scott/archive8
Ned Scott/archive9 Ned Scott/archive current Ned Scott/sandbox
Ned Scott/sandbox/IncidentArchive405 Ned Scott/sandbox/IncidentArchive406