User talk:Viriditas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archives: Index1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32
Nature by Kasia.jpg



I'm still working on the draft split. In the meantime a new edit to the parent article removes ""such and so in his whatever book/article said that" phrasing". I had the idea that the person making a claim/statement/opinion in the Wikipedia article should be identified as such in the article body ("Mr. ABC, author of WXY, says ...., Ms. DEF, author of YTX, says ...") partly because a source may quote other people, and because in my opinion using "One source says" without specifying who it is sounds vague. On the other hand, it would make article writing look less clunky if the author wasn't always identified.

I don't really know where to get editor opinions on this style difference. I may edit my draft based upon feedback on this style. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@WhisperToMe: Attribution is best practice. Stylistically, it may be acceptable to remove it in some instances, such as for matters of simple fact or to maintain a consistent narrative. However, it looks like there are other problems with that diff, rather than just attribution. Viriditas (talk) 04:42, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Okay. Does this mean the article should specify that John Belshaw called the people who made the term the "bitter elite"? I think that the changes such as "Another wrote that" don't look good because the reader is going to be asking "who"? - The "who" is a part of "who, what, where, when, why".
What are your thoughts about the internal comments in that diff?
WhisperToMe (talk) 05:07, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
@WhisperToMe: It seems appropriate to cite historian John Belshaw in this instance.[1] Viriditas (talk) 05:59, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Been doing some thinking[edit]

Hey Viriditas, I've been doing some thinking about my own wiki-history and about the place the place that collaboration has in article-writing on Wikipedia. One of the things I realized was that were it not for your timely intervention and guidance on Loihi all the way back in 2009, I probably would have frustrated myself right out of involvement in the project. I feel responsible for failing to pass that on here, when I declined to help out another editor with his first article, with the aforementioned unfortunate results. ResMar 03:14, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

@Resident Mario: I'm sure you can find someone else to help! :) Viriditas (talk) 04:36, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Your comment on the PK Dick television adaptation, re: status of article[edit]

I agree entirely with your statement there. How general is your concern? Chat here? Le Prof (talk) 19:11, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

@ Which discussion page? Man in the High Castle? Viriditas (talk) 19:57, 27 February 2015 (UTC)


I have more or less finished doing the proofread of a book called "Myths, Martyrs, and Marines of Mokapu" about the Marine Corps Base Hawaii for addition to wikisource, but find that, being the incompetent I am in computerese stuff, I still can't get my .djvu plug-in to work to allow me to upload the .djvu file available at here so that I can start an "index" page over there to add the proofread text to. I don't know if you are any better at that than I am, but if you could add the .djvu file to commons and let me know that I could do the hard part of the proofread over at wikisource and maybe make the text more freely and easily available. I actually thought of this when TParis retired, as I thought it might be nice if we could put up some sort of "thank you" template to him somewhere for all his work here. John Carter (talk) 19:40, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

@John Carter: Sounds interesting. I'm always happy to help. Let me look into this. TParis' pings didn't work when he posted the original retirement message because he didn't sign it, so I wonder if everyone he thanked knows about it. I like your idea of a "thank you" template, and we should pursue that idea further. Wouldn't it be great to memorialize the editors here, like people do with plaques and tiles elsewhere? Viriditas (talk) 20:01, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
@John Carter: I couldn't get the DjVu plug-in to work either, but I'm using Linux at the moment. However, I'm fairly certain that the files you are looking for are located here. Do you still need me to upload them to Commons now that you know how to access them? Viriditas (talk) 01:01, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Under the circumstances, I think I can upload the .pdf file to wikisource and set up the index which is required for the proofreading of the basis on its basis. If someone else really wants to have it as a .djvu, they can upload that particular file themselves. John Carter (talk) 16:08, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Vancouver subsections[edit]

Thanks! What I may do is see if I can add more content to each subsection, and if they remain small have them folded back into the parent section. That way the "bigger" subsections remain but the smaller ones do not. I'll work on it some more as I get time. :) WhisperToMe (talk) 05:11, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

ATA and the Mission District of San Francisco[edit]

I'm sure there are many institutions in the Mission District. That does not mean that the article should link to all of their websites. WP:ELNO suggests that we avoid adding links to sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject. The Artists' Television Access websites will not contribute to readers' understanding of the Mission District. ATA is a very specific subject, and the Mission is a much more general one. Therefore, these links do not belong in the article.—Stepheng3 (talk) 01:18, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

@Stepheng3: Please familiarize yourself with the history of the MIssion. ATA has an important role, as much as any other links. Ideally, the links need to be turned into content and mentioned in the article. Your deletion of these specific links makes me think you aren't familiar with its role. You are certainly welcome to self-educate yourself by starting here, and adding the relevant content to the article. The sources are clear: ""A key media-activist hub...The ATA office is one of the most famous rooms in the Mission District..." Viriditas (talk) 01:26, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Whether ATA played an important role is not the issue. Artists' Television Access has its own article on the English Wikipedia, which is where those external links belong. They do not belong in the Mission District, San Francisco article.—Stepheng3 (talk) 20:50, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
@Stepheng3: you've directly avoided the central issue. Again, is Artists' Television Access discussed in the Mission District article? As I explained previously, the person who added the links did so in lieu of adding the material to the article. External link sections were once used similarly to further reading sections; in other words, if it isn't discussed in the article, add it. You seem to be refusing to work on the encyclopedia, instead preferring to act as some kind of automaton who cherry picks links for deletion based on no rhyme or reason. There is a history to the use of external link sections, and there is a reason you're supposed to add the content before removing it. And you should be removing all the other external links as well instead of focusing on ATA. The encyclopedia isn't either or, black or white; it has a history and its editors aren't machines, they're humans with the ability to discern and make judgments beyond "keep" or delete. Viriditas (talk) 23:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chain Reaction (sculpture)[edit]

The article Chain Reaction (sculpture) you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Chain Reaction (sculpture) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Btphelps -- Btphelps (talk) 17:21, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Frances Ames[edit]

Harrias talk 21:42, 3 March 2015 (UTC)