Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)

 Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous 

• Table of contents
• First discussion
• End of page
• New post

The miscellaneous section of the village pump is used to post messages that do not fit into any other category. Please post on the policy, technical, or proposals pages, or – for assistance – at the help desk, rather than here, if at all appropriate. For general knowledge questions, please use the reference desk.

« Archives, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78

I demand the ArbCom members step down

Please read my message to the ArbCom. This concerns my permanent ban a few months ago. I would love to tell you all about it, but I really have no idea what happened. Still. I was banned, then unbanned, and all I got was a stupid apology and a wall of silence. They would like to pretend this is all over and done with, but with this, let it be known it is far from over. Other than that, you will have to look to the logs for details... Here it is:

{{quote|

Help with translation from Greek to English

Can anyone help by reading an article i have translated from greek to english? I want someone who speaks greek. Xaris333 (talk) 13:50, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Have you visited Wikipedia:Translation?--SPhilbrick(Talk) 14:32, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Νο. Thx! Xaris333 (talk) 20:32, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Hidden infoboxes

Are collapsed/ hidden infoboxes acceptable? Please comment at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#Hidden infoboxes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:17, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Common fallacies

http://logan43000.tumblr.com/post/42298850969/some-common-logical-fallacies-very-interesting

Just sharing for fun/reference. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:43, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:Accuracy Dispute

Is Accuracy Dispute an essay or a guideline? It can't be both! -- Ypnypn (talk) 15:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Is it ironic to have an accuracy dispute at the top of WP:Accuracy Dispute, or just funny?  :-) GoingBatty (talk) 03:05, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

This is interesting. Looking at the page history, this diff seems to show that Wikipedia:Disputed statement, a guideline, was merged into Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute, an essay. The problem is, I'm not sure if the consensus to merge also concluded that accuracy dispute should be "promoted" in its entirety. I don't see a problem with it being a guideline per se, but I don't know if there was ever any discussion on the subject.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:57, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Overcategorization of fiction by topic?

I noticed the category Category:Rape in video games, which turns out to be part of a larger categorization scheme (Category:Rape in fiction). There aren't any categories like Category:Songs about murder, Category:Racism in fiction, Category:Poems about science, Category:Religion in anime and manga, Category:Adoption in video games. I did find a few other categories that mirror this, such as Category:Incest in fiction, Category:Twins in fiction, Category:Dreams in fiction, Category:Alien visitations in fiction and similar subcategories, though. Why are some topics subject to strangely obsessive overcategorization? There are a few similar ones like Category:Mafias in fiction and Category:Cannibalism in fiction, but they is not subdivided into a million things like "plays" "television" "film" "video games" "songs" "anime and manga" "poems" "comics" "novels". Is this an example of Wikipedia:Overcategorization? Or are such hyperspecific categories welcomed? If they are welcome, then there should be guidelines, e.g. If there are twins in an anime but they are minor characters does it fall into "Twins in anime and manga"? Should every video game with the option for the player to kill or take items from people go in "Murder in video games"/"Theft in video games"?

I found a CFD discussion that seems relevant: "either categorizing or listifying films by the sort of scenes they contain is overcategorization"
"I don't think it makes sense to start a convention of categorizing films based on specific scenes. There's thousands of possible things that happen in films, and I don't want to see Films which include a kidnapping, Films which contain nude scenes, Films which contain gun violence, etc."
"Categories are for defining characteristics, which "contains scenes depicting X" is generally not."
"If we created categories for every possible ... topic, most articles would have more categories than content."

In my opinion, Category:Fiction by topic is fine. No need to get so specific with everything. --Atlantima (talk) 23:35, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Much of the benefit of categorization by loose correlation escapes me. Your first example seems to fit item #1 in the WP:NOTDIR criteria, and would almost appear to scandalously associate video games with a heinous crime. Praemonitus (talk) 05:14, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Casualty of war

The 'Casualty of war' article doesn't seem particularly useful, especially when compared to 'List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll'. What do you think should be done with it? Praemonitus (talk) 00:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Pushed it in the direction it was going.--KTo288 (talk) 01:51, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Praemonitus (talk) 02:07, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Footnote problem in Princess Beatrice of the United Kingdom

Hi! There is a problem with footnote 46 in Princess Beatrice of the United Kingdom (featured article). It says "Hibbert, p. 94" but there is no Hibbert's book in the bibliography. Can someone correct this point ? Thank you. 31.39.53.205 (talk) 07:46, 12 March 2013 (UTC)