Revision as of 14:34, 19 April 2013 editSteeletrap (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users10,937 edits →Request for Help from New User← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:37, 19 April 2013 edit undoSteeletrap (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users10,937 edits →Request for Help from New UserNext edit → | ||
Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
::Watch out for ] remarks, you might be taken on a trip to the ]! {{=2|crazy}} – ] (]) 03:28, 19 April 2013 (UTC) | ::Watch out for ] remarks, you might be taken on a trip to the ]! {{=2|crazy}} – ] (]) 03:28, 19 April 2013 (UTC) | ||
:::Ha ha - well played! ]] 03:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC) | :::Ha ha - well played! ]] 03:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC) | ||
:::: Stalwart, my independent research on the |
:::: Stalwart, my independent research on the von Mises Institute (for the Master's degree thesis on American fringe political movements) has led me to be highly concerned with the NPOV and (in some cases) notability of many (probably most) of the Misplaced Pages articles of Ludwig von Mises Institute scholars. This is a big project -- and given my nature as a noob who is strongly biased against them, I may not be the optimal person to undertake it -- but would you mind suggesting to wiser (and more level-headed) people than I that they look into this? Despite my bias, I believe that on strictly factual grounds that it's pretty clear that the articles depart from NPOV. (For example, the piece on Mises Institute fellow ] refers to him as an "economist" despite no formal economic training and makes no mention of the fact that he has -- in numerous credible secondary sources (e.g., http://www.alternet.org/story/40318/public_stoning%3A_not_just_for_the_taliban_anymore and (you need to answer a question to read this page) http://reason.com/archives/1998/11/01/invitation-to-a-stoning) -- been widely criticized for advocated that non-violent people (such as homosexuals and blasphemers of the Christian God) be (literally) stoned to death. Other pieces (not all) show virtually no evidence of notability. I have already expressed my view regarding the notability of ]. But consider in this regard the page ], who lacks any citations other than those from the Mises Institute and an obituary. If you agree with me that this might be a problem, is there any Misplaced Pages "board" you could refer to to check these articles for NPOV (and when needed, remove them)? ] (]) 14:28, 19 April 2013 (UTC) | ||
== Fair enough == | == Fair enough == |
Revision as of 14:37, 19 April 2013
This is Stalwart111's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 6 sections are present. |
(Barnstars and Wikilove) Right here |
Camille Saroyan
Camille Saroyan is a fictional person from a TV show. The deletion of the article on her should not have been put in the biographies category. I moved it to fiction and the arts.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- All good - responded here. Stalwart111 08:00, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Vatican City
Good to meet you, and it was fun seeing the additions add up on the 'Index of Vatican City-related articles'. I was reading the ones you added, thanks for the education. It's been nice adding the Vatican City topics template to articles, as well as the Sistine Chapel template (which wasn't on 'Vatican Museums'!). Please have a look at the Sistine Chapel template and see if it would fit anywhere else, possibly on all the pages listed on it! (I'll look at those later). Are there anymore Vatican City page? Again, good to meet you. Randy Kryn 13:04 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- lol Thanks for the kind words, and that's the first barnstar or anything I've "gotten" here. Very appreciated. Yeah, I seem enthused about the new Pope, the first one in my life I actually seem to like, so it got me adding data on his new residence, which skipped me into the Index and the templates. I've found adding lists to "See also's" provide a good link which is used by many readers. Time consuming but rewarding. And for some reason our exchange reminds me to mainspace an stub article I've done on one of Martin Luther King's speeches, which I'll do now. Thanks again. Randy Kryn 13:14 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- Whoo. You've done some very nice work. I'll give a closer read to the Gallery of maps next log on, it's something I haven't heard of. Signing off now, but I want to get back to you on your articles and the Sistine stuff. I haven't checked, but is the template on all the artwork pages listed?? More later. Randy Kryn 13:26 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- Just read your Carlo Rossetti article, and I realize I know nothing of that period of history (I'm not a studied historian of catholic topics), and never heard of the "First Bishop's War" - my first thought "There were more of them?" Nice work! I'll do more with the "Sistine Chapel" template, it's a good one and should be shown more. Just put it on the "Vatican City" page, which of all things didn't have it. Into the mines... Randy Kryn 23:03 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- p.s. I'll leave this for you if you don't mind. The very first sentence of "Sistine Chapel" says its in the Apostolic Palace, so I popped a SC template on Apostolic Palace, but saw the article doesn't mention the chapel. And this link says] it's a self-contained building. Can you take this one, as it's out of my knowledge level - it seems the Sistine Chapel page is wrong right in the first sentence!
- Hello, and I promise not to monopolize your talk page today. One thing though, the Apostolic Palace page doesn't mention the Sistine Chapel as being there (neither does the Sistine Chapel ceiling page), and you'd think it'd be trumpeted with pics and tickets being sold just to view the page. Nothing. Tumbleweeds. The only place I could find on wikipedia that the Sistine Chapel is in the Apostolic Palace is in the very first sentence in the Sistine Chapel article!! Methinks a mystery brews. Maybe you or another regular on the Catholic pages can dig just a little into this and find the place (I've never been to the Vatican, and maps show it as outside the Apostolic Palace). Am semi-proud to say I put the Sistine Chapel template on the 'Michaelangelo' page yesterday, which, I've heard from unreliable sources, has stopped him from turning over in his grave. Enjoy, and if you get as far as the Sistine Chapel ceiling, bring watercolors and chalk. Randy Kryn 11:42 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, you have substantially changed the Sistine Chapel page to reflect the truth of the matter, and now wikipedia can finally take its place among the great encyclopedias of its age. At least you and I have more of an education about the Chapel and the Palace (now there's a name for a movie starring Anne Hathaway and some interchangable-boy-hunk as the priest "The Chapel and the Palace"). I like the original sistine chapel better, it looked more ancient yet comfortable. Now, from the overhead you found, the outside of the palace attachments all seem to be cookie-cutter. "They" likely attached it and changed the exterior to control access (and to sort out the paying customers form the riff-raff). Thanks, that was quite an adventure. On a boring serious note, you may be right about an update to the Palace article to let people know that the Sistine is accessible through an entrance there. I'll gladly not edit it, as you have much more knowledge of the page's architecture and the Palace's architecture. I added quite a few more items in the "Index" yesterday, but my favorite was putting the Sistine template on the Michaelangelo and Botticeili pages (and a couple of the "minor" painters involved with the chapel's art as well). With all this going on maybe I'll have to take a trip to Vatican City and stand in one of those long lines for four hours....well, maybe not. Oh, another serious note, I haven't looked if the gigapans of the artwork in St. Peters and the Raphael Rooms, etc., is on any of the external links. Do you know? If not, then those are definite additions! Thanks for the data on the chapel. Randy Kryn 11:23 5 April 2013 (UTC)
- Hello, and I promise not to monopolize your talk page today. One thing though, the Apostolic Palace page doesn't mention the Sistine Chapel as being there (neither does the Sistine Chapel ceiling page), and you'd think it'd be trumpeted with pics and tickets being sold just to view the page. Nothing. Tumbleweeds. The only place I could find on wikipedia that the Sistine Chapel is in the Apostolic Palace is in the very first sentence in the Sistine Chapel article!! Methinks a mystery brews. Maybe you or another regular on the Catholic pages can dig just a little into this and find the place (I've never been to the Vatican, and maps show it as outside the Apostolic Palace). Am semi-proud to say I put the Sistine Chapel template on the 'Michaelangelo' page yesterday, which, I've heard from unreliable sources, has stopped him from turning over in his grave. Enjoy, and if you get as far as the Sistine Chapel ceiling, bring watercolors and chalk. Randy Kryn 11:42 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- p.s. I'll leave this for you if you don't mind. The very first sentence of "Sistine Chapel" says its in the Apostolic Palace, so I popped a SC template on Apostolic Palace, but saw the article doesn't mention the chapel. And this link says] it's a self-contained building. Can you take this one, as it's out of my knowledge level - it seems the Sistine Chapel page is wrong right in the first sentence!
- Thought you'd like an update. I put that great old drawing of the Sistine Chapel you left on my talk page on the Sistine chapel page. And added a lot more links to the Index page. It may be getting closer to completion (maybe you and others can take a look at it and see if there are any missed links. Would 'Papal states' qualify for that page, I'm not sure.) We've done good work together the last few days, nice meeting you. Randy Kryn 13:08 6 April 2013 (UTC)
- Just read your Carlo Rossetti article, and I realize I know nothing of that period of history (I'm not a studied historian of catholic topics), and never heard of the "First Bishop's War" - my first thought "There were more of them?" Nice work! I'll do more with the "Sistine Chapel" template, it's a good one and should be shown more. Just put it on the "Vatican City" page, which of all things didn't have it. Into the mines... Randy Kryn 23:03 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- I'm back! Have still been working on the Vatican City Index, and between you and I we've expanded it from 26 articles to 116 articles. Some of those are stubs, but because the Index is now linked to every page hopefully the increased number of people seeing it will encourage some to add to some of the pages. A question: On my journey to add articles I've come across many categories related to Vatican City. Since templates are on the Index page, is it wikipedian-legal to add a section of 'Categories' and list them as well (not linking the Index to them, but listing them in alphabetical order under their own section). Those are my questions one. And thanks again for popping in that great artwork of the Sistine, hopefully it will stay on the Sistine chapel page for a few millenium. Randy Kryn 15:34 11-4-'13
- Whoo. You've done some very nice work. I'll give a closer read to the Gallery of maps next log on, it's something I haven't heard of. Signing off now, but I want to get back to you on your articles and the Sistine stuff. I haven't checked, but is the template on all the artwork pages listed?? More later. Randy Kryn 13:26 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Invitation to WikiProject Breakfast
Hello, Stalwart111.
You are invited to join WikiProject Breakfast, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Misplaced Pages's coverage of breakfast-related topics. |
---|
- And a much-deserved barnstar was given out for that very friendly invitation. Many thanks. Stalwart111 08:00, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar | |
Thanks for telling me about New Post going to the bottom Lukong15 (talk) 21:39, 8 April 2013 (UTC) |
- Very nice of you - hope you continue to contribute. Stalwart111 08:00, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry I guess its a lot to read?
Could you somehow have my accounted deleted? I needed to know a bit more then comeback and answer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukong15 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
- Was not a problem - look forward to working with you. Stalwart111 08:00, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
User page draft will be deleted
Per the discussion it was determined that the efforts that you participated in at User:TheRedPenOfDoom/sandbox/heterophobia had lead to the conclusion that there was not enough content to overcome WP:DICDEF and so instead of an article, the term will be a redirect to Wiktionary.
I will be requesting a deletion of the sandbox draft that you contributed to. Please feel free to contact an admin to have it restored and moved to your user space if you wish to continue working. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:52, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- All sorted, and with thanks (once again) to TRPOD for his work. Stalwart111 08:00, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Request for Help from New User
Hello Stalwart. Thank you for greeting me to Misplaced Pages (I am the one who nominated the Stephan Kinsella page for deletion). I hope you don't mind this request for help, and hope it doesn't clutter your talk page!
For years I have been concerned that the Hans-Hermann Hoppe article was not written from a NPOV. Specifically, it omits statements Hoppe made in Democracy: The God That Failed that have widely been perceived to be anti-gay. I added a section on the Hans-Hermann Hoppe page entitled "Anti-Gay Views and Allegations of Racism." I ask that you read the citations and let me know if you think it's fair/relevant, and (if so) please draw some attention to the page to prevent vandalism which has (in my judgment) happened quite often to the Misplaced Pages pages of Mises Institute libertarians over the years.
Full disclosure: I am working on a Master's thesis on fringe political movement's in the United States and, in the process, have developed a negative view of Mises Institute libertarians (such as Hoppe and Kinsella). Does that mean I shouldn't be commenting on these articles?
Edit: It just got reverted. I am honestly perplexed as to how that's irrelevant, but will not get into an edit war. But here is a link to the original edits I made. http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hans-Hermann_Hoppe&oldid=550859252#Anti-Gay_Views_and_Allegations_of_Racism
Steeletrap (talk) 19:44, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
- All good - responded here. Stalwart111 12:21, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- Watch out for WP:CHEESY remarks, you might be taken on a trip to the motorbike shed! – S. Rich (talk) 03:28, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- Ha ha - well played! Stalwart111 03:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- Stalwart, my independent research on the von Mises Institute (for the Master's degree thesis on American fringe political movements) has led me to be highly concerned with the NPOV and (in some cases) notability of many (probably most) of the Misplaced Pages articles of Ludwig von Mises Institute scholars. This is a big project -- and given my nature as a noob who is strongly biased against them, I may not be the optimal person to undertake it -- but would you mind suggesting to wiser (and more level-headed) people than I that they look into this? Despite my bias, I believe that on strictly factual grounds that it's pretty clear that the articles depart from NPOV. (For example, the piece on Mises Institute fellow Gary North refers to him as an "economist" despite no formal economic training and makes no mention of the fact that he has -- in numerous credible secondary sources (e.g., http://www.alternet.org/story/40318/public_stoning%3A_not_just_for_the_taliban_anymore and (you need to answer a question to read this page) http://reason.com/archives/1998/11/01/invitation-to-a-stoning) -- been widely criticized for advocated that non-violent people (such as homosexuals and blasphemers of the Christian God) be (literally) stoned to death. Other pieces (not all) show virtually no evidence of notability. I have already expressed my view regarding the notability of Stephan Kinsella. But consider in this regard the page Burton Blumert, who lacks any citations other than those from the Mises Institute and an obituary. If you agree with me that this might be a problem, is there any Misplaced Pages "board" you could refer to to check these articles for NPOV (and when needed, remove them)? Steeletrap (talk) 14:28, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- Ha ha - well played! Stalwart111 03:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- Watch out for WP:CHEESY remarks, you might be taken on a trip to the motorbike shed! – S. Rich (talk) 03:28, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough
I saw your post - I'll back off. But you might want to have a word with the IP in question, too. He also dropped me a line or six. I guess he's not as blameless as he appears. Vilano XIV (talk) 12:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
My talk page is not 4chan. |
---|
So, what I've posted is wrong - but this is OK? 3 Step program to success.
206.45.84.7 (talk) 12:00, 18 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vilano XIV (talk • contribs)
|
- C'mon guys, you're both clearly smarter than this. I've responded here. Stalwart111 12:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC)