Jump to content

User talk:J Milburn: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Siobhan O'Sullivan: In case you're interested
Line 53: Line 53:
:::Article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Ethics_in_the_Wild [[User:Throughthemind|Throughthemind]] ([[User talk:Throughthemind|talk]]) 17:17, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Ethics_in_the_Wild [[User:Throughthemind|Throughthemind]] ([[User talk:Throughthemind|talk]]) 17:17, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
::::Great to see! I'll drop in some more references if/when I see them. [[User:J Milburn|Josh Milburn]] ([[User talk:J Milburn|talk]]) 09:02, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
::::Great to see! I'll drop in some more references if/when I see them. [[User:J Milburn|Josh Milburn]] ([[User talk:J Milburn|talk]]) 09:02, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

== Dolwyddelan Castle ==

Hello Josh! Thank you for reviewing my [[Template:Did you know nominations/Dolwyddelan Castle|DYK nomination]] so quickly. I can confirm I don't need to review another DYK nom as this is my first nomination, so that hopefully means we're good to go. Best wishes, [[User:A.D.Hope|A.D.Hope]] ([[User talk:A.D.Hope|talk]]) 18:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:48, 24 July 2023

SEMI-RETIRED
This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.

Thanks for dropping by! Please leave new messages at the bottom of the page. Messages here will often be read by a number of people. If you would rather discuss an issue privately, you can email me. I typically reply here, and, if I do, I will typically tag you in the message. If I haven't gotten back to you in a week and/or haven't gotten to something I said would, feel free to leave a reminder.

Hi, do you know if Siobhan O'Sullivan was an animal rights advocate or was she was animal welfare? There are a couple of confused articles, I would like to sort them out so that they have the correct categories and template. She is currently on the animal rights template. Psychologist Guy (talk) 21:05, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This link (her university) says animal welfare [1] Psychologist Guy (talk) 21:08, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Psychologist Guy: She was an advocate of animal rights (in the broad sense at the very least), but a lot of her work was about animal welfare, in part because her work was a little more emperical than that of a lot of people working on animals and political theory. I'd argue that she's an important name in animal rights because of her major role in the 'political turn', which is a mostly rights-y literature. Here's a paper by Tony Milligan that explicitly situates her in that way. Meanwhile, in this coauthored paper, she explicitly rejects the animal rights/animal welfare binary. So I think it'd be fair to classify her as part of both 'animal rights' and 'animal welfare'. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:22, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info. I know some other authors have also rejected the animal rights or welfare classification. It's makes it a bit harder to categorize them at Wikipedia. I know that Marc Bekoff firmly opposes animal welfare but he sometimes works with such groups. I am not convinced with the authors arguments but it is sad to see both authors are now deceased who wrote "The Political Turn in Animal Ethics". Someone you may be interested in is Karen Bradshaw author of Wildlife as Property Owners [2], I believe she would qualify for an article at Wikipedia, I might try and create it next month. Psychologist Guy (talk) 10:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Psychologist Guy: The Political Turn in Animal Ethics was from O'Sullivan and Robert Garner -- Garner is still alive (to the best of my knowledge!). He's a different person from Gary Varner, who recently died. And yes, I know Karen, but not well. I interviewed her a couple of years ago, and I agree that an article about her would be good. Fun fact: Her book was included in a goody bag for the Grammies! Josh Milburn (talk) 14:42, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the correction, I believe I have confused those two authors before in the past. That's a good podcast with Karen Bradshaw, I have listened to some of your other podcasts including one with Michael Huemer. An issue with BLP's with people involved with animal rights or welfare is that they are not all notable so will probably end up being removed from Wikipedia, for example, Jonathan Birch wouldn't qualify for an article, so it would be pointless me spending time creating it [3].
Most of my article creations are for deceased individuals, I find the historical stuff more interesting and there are more sources. I have created articles for Laurids Smith, Humphrey Primatt, David Renaud Boullier, Herman Daggett, Richard Dean, Herman Daggett, Christian Adam Dann, Wilhelm Dietler, C. W. Hume etc. What's interesting to me is that many of these thinkers have already proposed many of the "new" ideas taken up by recent researchers in the field of animal rights/welfare but these old researchers are forgotten. The problem is that many of these old books written in the 1700 and 1800s were not translated into English. I plan on translating many of these works myself and uploading them to archive.org for free because they are in the public domain. Wilhelm Dietler' book for example makes an early argument from marginal cases that has gone unnoticed. Every year a lot of new papers come out on animal ethics but there is very little to do with historical research. I have a list of forgotten European animal rights writers from the 1700s and 1800s. If I am able to translate the books and put them out there, hopefully modern researchers might cite some of the older researchers. Psychologist Guy (talk) 21:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm sympathetic to what you say. There are a few 'forgotten' thinkers who are now becoming a bit more familiar to animal ethicists (Porphyry, Salt, Cobbe etc.) and some effort to recognise the animal-friendly elements of well-known thinkers. But I agree with you that there's lots of work to be done.
I think Birch is Wikipedia-notable, by the way. His work is (as far as philosophy goes) very highly cited, and (as far as I can remember) there's a fairly direct link between some of his work and government policy, so I suspect he meets WP:ACADEMIC. Meanwhile, his book was widely reviewed (eg, 1, 2, 3 (by Michael Ruse, no less), 4, 5 ('review article'), 6 (ditto)) so I suspect he meets WP:AUTHOR. I'll look into putting together an article myself, and we can see if it sticks. Josh Milburn (talk) 08:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Made a start. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:05, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree I didn't realise that, Jonathan Birch has a lot of reliable book reviews I see you have found so I think he would qualify for an article easily. I have just realised that you can actually take screenshots of certain YouTube videos that are uploaded on YouTube under a CC license (example Joey Carbstrong [4]). They are freely licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license. Therefore in theory your article creations could add a YouTube snapshot such as for Bob Fischer etc. I created a lot of articles and didn't realise this, so I will probably be updating many with images. Psychologist Guy (talk) 17:20, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, great point. I'll look into that! Josh Milburn (talk) 08:50, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Psychologist Guy: Jonathan Birch (philosopher) is now in the mainspace. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:47, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 July 2023

Women in Red 8th Anniversary

Women in Red 8th Anniversary
In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap!

--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Catia Faria's book Animal Ethics in the Wild notability

Hi, I'm thinking of creating an article for this book, but I'm not sure if it meets sufficient notability yet because I've only managed to find one formal review: https://philpapers.org/rec/BOBCFA

Do you know of any other sources that would help demonstrate sufficient notability for an article? Throughthemind (talk) 10:20, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Throughthemind: You timed this question well; I've just had my review accepted in Utilitas; I suspect it'll be online in a couple of weeks, but you can see the author accepted version here. The Bekoff's Psychology Today piece or Johannsen's interview as part of the New Books Network are surely citable, but I wouldn't lean on them for determining notability. But two "proper" book reviews (Bobier and I) is probably just enough. I've no doubt other book reviews will appear in time. Faria and CUP have also done an impressive job of gathering pre-publication praise, but, again, I don't think that's going to be helpful for etablishing notability. Josh Milburn (talk) 11:07, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, thanks! I'd say that's enough to make a start. Throughthemind (talk) 14:46, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Ethics_in_the_Wild Throughthemind (talk) 17:17, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Great to see! I'll drop in some more references if/when I see them. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:02, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dolwyddelan Castle

Hello Josh! Thank you for reviewing my DYK nomination so quickly. I can confirm I don't need to review another DYK nom as this is my first nomination, so that hopefully means we're good to go. Best wishes, A.D.Hope (talk) 18:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]