User talk:Josiah Rowe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
  1. 2005
  2. Jan–Feb 2006
  3. Mar–Apr 2006
  4. May–Jun 2006
  5. Jul–Aug 2006
  6. Sep–Oct 2006
  7. Nov–Dec 2006
  8. Jan–Feb 2007
  9. Mar–Apr 2007
  10. Jun–Aug 2007
  11. Sep–Oct 2007
  12. Nov 2007–Feb 2008
  13. Mar–Apr 2008
  14. May–Aug 2008
  15. Sep–Oct 2008
  16. Nov–Dec 2008
  17. Jan–Apr 2009
  18. May–Dec 2009
  19. 2010
  20. 2011
  21. 2012
  22. 2013

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived.

Click here to add a new topic.

Someone else nominated this, but didn't alert you.[edit]

[1]. (talk) 05:53, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For having identified and erased the "Ashlin" vandal that nobody noticed since it was entered on 25 July 2013. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:06, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! (I may have noticed it because my daughter's name is Ashlin.) —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 16:27, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of The Discontinuity Guide for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Discontinuity Guide is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Discontinuity Guide until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 19:58, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


...for your polite and reasonable comment regarding a section in the Washington Redskins name controversy. I have made the change suggested. Through no action of my own, except editing in my own style, I have become virtually the author of this article, which is a bad situation. Everyone needs feedback to avoid POV wording. I do not "socialize" online, and have had few discussions on how to be a wikipedian, so I must rely on my background in academic writing. I do research using my online link to the George Mason University library, and Google for the latest news. I try to restate each source as it is written, and as you noted this may border on plagiarism. It is such a hot topic in the news I may be lazy and cut and past a key paragraph and reword it. I am grateful when others come by to wordsmith and correct; but I also need to find substantive collaborators. Any suggestions?FriendlyFred (talk) 13:19, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Generally, a simple rephrasing is enough to avoid plagiarism issues. However, when you're rephrasing, it's useful to put the content through a "Wikipedia filter" — making sure that the wording you're putting in place is in keeping with key Wikipedia policies like WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. (Providing the citation should take care of the other key policies, WP:V and WP:NOR.)
There's an essay at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing which may address some of your concerns about staying too close to a source's wording. I wish that I had the time to go through the article and do a close edit, but I'm afraid I don't. I'm a fairly casual Wikipedian these days, and even though I retain the admin bit I rarely use it.
I'll keep Washington Redskins name controversy on my watchlist, and try to keep an eye on it when I can. I wish that I had a suggestion for how to find more active collaborators, but unfortunately it's a fairly widespread problem and I don't know the solution. Honestly, I'm surprised that there isn't some football fan who wants to work on the article with you. Often the best way to ensure NPOV is to have editors with different opinions and backgrounds working together; at its best, it's sort of like the Hegelian dialectic in action. (Though, of course, the process doesn't always reach that ideal.) You might try dropping a line at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject American football and/or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, to see if there are any active editors who would like to collaborate with you.
Good luck! —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 07:33, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

DrWho -- the Ark[edit]

   I guess i b'lieve you that it's {{DISPLAYTITLE:''The Ark'' (Doctor Who)}} not {{DISPLAYTITLE:The Ark (''Doctor Who'')}}, but IMO it's bizarre and a ref sure would help me! (Y'know how it sucks to tell a colleague "I dunno why, a guy on WP told me to"?)
   In any case, you left the error msg active; have you already started to fix that or should i proceed with that part of the fix?
--Jerzyt 04:26, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not sure what error message you're referring to. As for the italics, I suppose that what it really should be is The Ark (Doctor Who) — both the serial title (The Ark) and the series (Doctor Who) get italics, per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles#Italics, which lists "Television and radio programs, specials, shows, series and serials". The convention is that individual episodes are placed in quotation marks (so, in the case of The Ark, we would refer to episode 1, "The Steel Sky" in quotation marks), but the title for the full serial goes into italics. There are not very many TV series set up this way, with each story being a multi-episode serial, but the original 26-year run of Doctor Who was one.
I'm not entirely certain how to use DISPLAYTITLE in a case like this; there are lots of articles on Doctor Who serials which are titled in this manner, from Marco Polo (Doctor Who) to Survival (Doctor Who). If there's a problem with the way the titles are currently displayed, all the similarly named articles should be changed as well. —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 04:33, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
   As to the error msg: I'm pretty sure i went ahead and fixed it after a decent interval, but it's worth saying that most executions of DISPLAYTITLE (a wp:magic word which i'll call dispttl for the sake of brevity and eyestrain-relief) occur transparently within executions of templates, where explicit or implicit control-flow loops may examine each character of the template argument, e.g. in {{italictitle}} looking for the open-parenthesis and ceasing italicizing for it and the remaining characters of the article title; that's why "Doctor Who" comes out romanized in the type of titles we are discussing.
   However, editors may either explicitly use dispttl, and/or use multiple dispttl-invoking templates, and in doing so cause multiple evocations of it in the same article, tho its intended role makes every multiple evocation either redundant or contradictory. Hence, each dispttl, subsequent to the first on the wiki page, (a) countermands the preceding one, and (b) generates a red error message inserted at the corresponding point within the page's markup. When the 2nd invocation comes late enuf on the page, the error message is easy to miss (and almost inevitably missed if an editor is doing a section edit of the initial section).
   A lot of such messages are the result of editors not realizing that directives which format the display-title (not only explicit dispttl invocations, but embedded invocations in info-box templates for various genres of titled works, and in at least 3 templates explicitly dedicated to modifying the formatting, at the top of the page, of the title) are not cumulative. (Thus, in practice they require error msgs that hopefully someone will eventually notice and correctly construe.)
---Jerzyt 13:11, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
   (Hmm, arguably True Detective could end up being referenced that way, if they renew it for at least a 2nd season.)
   I think we are in agreement (and i think i already said so on the talk page of the first --or only?-- DrW article that i recently worked on; i'll apologize right now in case my tone there was not sufficiently conciliatory). I'd be glad to add the Doctor Who serials that use that title-format to my list of title-format-distressed articles that i've recently been working on, if that's what you'd like. (I presume they'll be east for me to track down, but i'd let you know when i thot i'd finished, so you could let me know if i'd missed some.)
   But IMO one of two other options would be even better:
  1. for me to help orient you (whom i presume to be a frequent Dr.W. editor) why problems have persisted and how and when to use DISPLAYTITLE to deal with it -- bcz i don't have much inherent interest, and the Dr.W.-like problem may be a pretty special case that would re-occur in the Dr.W. context more often than outside that context.
  2. While on one hand, it's not anywhere near as complicated as the number of not-quite-logical article titles IMO suggests, on the other, it's confusing enuf that it's probably worthwhile -- instead of relying on direct use of the somewhat finicky "dispttl", to petition for some template writing, either
  1. installation of a switch on {{italictitle}} (hmm, default or portion=1st as at present, but portion=2nd e.g. for Mindy (Mork and Mindy), and portion=both for the DrW cases we've mentioned), or
  2. creation of another specialized template, named, say, {{longsubwork}} or {{twoitalictitles}} (alternative names for use in the cases we've previously discussed)
(not necessarily to the exclusion of doing both).
My impression is that whoever created {{lcfirstitalictitle}} (lower-case first letter, then use italic, in both case in displaying article title above the article text[!])" for coping with another class of relatively rare cases, remains active within the WMF world.
Heh! And should Siegfried (opera) be the target of a Rdr Siegfried (The Ring)?
   (That's a big part of what i'm hoping you'll want to know, and IMO enuf for now of what i'm hoping you'll mull over.)
---Jerzyt 13:11, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, there's some mull-worthy stuff there. I don't know whether there are enough cases like this to merit either a switch on {{italictitle}} or to create another template; I've not been involved in template creation/modification before, so I don't have a sense of how difficult either would be. In addition to the serials discussed above, there are a few other Doctor Who-related pages which technically should have both the title and the disambiguator italicized: for example, Dead Air (Doctor Who) (an audiobook) should probably display as Dead Air (Doctor Who). That said, there doesn't seem to be much consistency about whether to use a series title like (Doctor Who) as a disambiguator, or whether it's better to use the medium, so usage is inconsistent. For example, there's Spare Parts (Doctor Who), The Light at the End (Doctor Who audio), and Primeval (audio drama), all in Category:Fifth Doctor audio plays. So in addition to the technical question, there's a style question of how these articles should really be titled in the first place. I suppose I'll inquire about that over at Wikipedia talk:Article titles. If I get an answer there, I'll have a better sense of how many Doctor Who-related pages require special treatment via DISPLAYTITLE, and how likely it is that we'll get call-up conflicts like this. —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 14:42, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

   Excellent plan, IMO. I feel confident that the strictly programming effort, in the hands of those conversant with the internals of the existing 3 related templates would be minor, but considering how widely used {{tl:italictitle}} is, there might be some more daunting obligatory review & verification effort needed.
   For me, there's a neat boundary drawn around "my part" of the problem: IIRC, i looked at only one or two Dr Who pages bcz they were among the handful in a Category that my attention was somehow drawn to... there it is, in my contribs: Category talk:Pages with DISPLAYTITLE conflicts, and the Cat page has 8 entries that i expect to work on again today. Someone might want to see examples of non-hypothetical problem cases by looking at my contributions starting with my 3rd one on Aug 4th. So while the offers made to you will stand if you find them promising, i'm going do disp-ttl fixes on those 2 DrW pages, and not range any further into Dr-Who-turf until your inquiries have borne some kind of fruit. Thanks!
--Jerzyt 16:01, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Redskins RfC[edit]

Hey Josiah,

Just wanted to let you know I improved the layout on the RfC for the Washington Redskins name controversy page. I created a "Survey" section and "Threaded discussion" section to follow the basic RfC layout. I placed your contribution under the "Threaded discussion" section. Just wanted to let you know. Feel free to make any changes you feel are necessary. Best, Meatsgains (talk) 14:10, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood Season 2[edit]

This is to advise you (if you don't already know) that season 2 of Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood will air starting Monday. The first four episodes have been announced with an air date and description on the talk page of the article. I would have started a table for Season 2, but I'm very much a newbie as far as this type of wikitable is concerned, so I wanted to ask you if you could take a look at the talk page and the relevant sources and get some kind of table up and running on the page ASAP. Sorry to ask that of you, but I don't have the know-how to do that on my own, and it appears that you do. Thanks in advance for taking care of this. If you have any reply to this message, please post it either on the article's talk page or on my personal talk page, as I don't often check other users' talk pages for responses to my comments. Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 19:11, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Acknowledging your note on my talk page. Thanks for taking care of that for us! Thanks for the great work you do! If there is anything I can do in return, just let me know. You can drop me a line on my talk page anytime. --Jgstokes (talk) 05:22, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Interesting to learn[edit]

Hello JR. We haven't bumped into each other in ages - I guess our TARDISs keep missing each other :-) This was interesting to learn. Thanks for posting it. I think one of the most amazing outside references for me is The Mutants showing up in The Satanic Verses. A new Doctor on Saturday!! I hope that you enjoy it. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 16:53, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Glad to inform! It was doing research for this which made me think to add the tidbit to The War Games. I'm excited for Capaldi, but won't be home on Saturday — we have a wedding out-of-state! Going to the movie showing on Monday to make up for it. See you around! —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 06:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Safe travels on your wedding travels!! If you take these lyrics and substitute in the line "A new Doctor tonight" I think you get something that works pretty well as a theme song each time we get a regeneration episode. I started hearing it in my head when Chris turned into David. BTW Jon Pertwee was in the London cast of the play that this song is from in 1963 and he also had a small role in the film!! Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 02:56, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I did A Funny Thing... in high school! (I played Hero, and knew about the Pertwee connection then...) —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 23:04, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Fun memories! Thanks for sharing it. MarnetteD|Talk 00:26, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


FYI: [2]. CC.

Your GA nomination of Fun Home (musical)[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fun Home (musical) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 05:42, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Hooray! —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 06:10, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Placed as GA on Hold -- there are indeed several issues to address -- but it shouldn't be too difficult to get to them. Good luck, — Cirt (talk) 16:50, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fun Home (musical)[edit]

The article Fun Home (musical) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Fun Home (musical) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 17:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fun Home (musical)[edit]

The article Fun Home (musical) you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Fun Home (musical) 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 Cirt -- Cirt (talk) 09:02, 6 October 2014 (UTC)


What do you know. About Pocahontas — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:13, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Only what I've read in various books and other reliable sources. Did you have a specific question? —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 15:17, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fun Home French cover.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Fun Home French cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:31, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho[edit]

Make sure to click on both pictures to see them full size Josiah Rowe as they will give you a chuckle. May your 2016 be full of joy and special times. MarnetteD|Talk 04:02, 20 December 2015 (UTC)