Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:25, 2 December 2016

GAR for Tycho Brahe

Tycho Brahe, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.

As I mentioned on the re-assessment page, the reviewer who took on the initial GA review is a very new editor having been here for just over a month. They haven't successfully contributed any GA's and weren't sufficiently familiar with GA expectations to give you a full review. As such, I have taken on the task of completing a GAR for the article. As a start the most pressing issues are with 2c and 6a. After those concerns are dealt with I'll move on to other criterion piece by piece with the intention of getting the article to GA status. I'll also be notifying the Wikiproject's who may be interested in participating. Ping me if you know of any other major contributors who may also be interested in participating in the GAR. Mr rnddude (talk) 23:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

You got mail

EvergreenFir (talk) 20:03, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Unproductive heat at MOS

Maunus, if you believe SMcCandlish is being uncivil, why not use your powers of persuasion and conciliation to bring about a better environment for negotiation? It's going nowhere at the moment. Tony (talk) 07:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

True.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 07:33, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

multiregional hypothesis

If you ever want to team up to get this page straight, let me know. Jonathan Tweet (talk) 02:11, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

A quick glance looks like it is pretty well developed and cites a lot of the relevant literature. Anything in particular you would like to straighten up about it? I havent read much about how the multiregionalists have responded to the most recent genetic data and the neanderthal and denisovan admixture findings - it seems that would require some restructuring of the hypothesis.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 05:05, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, Maunus. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Tiny Dancer 48 (talk) 15:20, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

It is pointless going any further going down the "race" road with this person, maunus. They are *totally* uninterested in the science. -Darouet (talk) 17:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

You are right, unfortunately this kind of editor pops up with a fairly regular frequency at that particular article and we have to dance a little while to their pipe before their agenda-driven disruption becomes blatant enugh that someone blocks them.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 18:43, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

The "agenda" of refuting Marxist pseudoscience with biology. Tiny Dancer 48 (talk) 19:03, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

With 60 years old biology.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 05:45, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Maunus:Please check and possibly re-add the RfC title. It contradicted the section title and was therefore very misleading. Thank you!--*thing goes (talk) 13:35, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

English language

Good day i just wanted to tell you that it is strange that in the very long lead of English language, the languages of the same language branch are not mentioned (Frisian, Dutch and German). It is also not mentioned that the English language derives its name from the Anglia peninsula in Germany. I wonder which facts could be more suitable for the lead apart from the language branch and the countries in which a language is spoken.TheLusatian (talk) 06:31, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

This discussion would be better had at the article discussion oage. I will copy your message there, if you don't mind.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 08:20, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Neanderthal talk

Hi! In case i deleted your edit, i wish to apologize. I did not actively mark anything and removed it. There was an edit conflict, which i accepted. All the bestWikirictor (talk) 12:36, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, yes, in fact you deleted it twice. I realize it wasnt on purpose but it was a little frustrating.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 12:38, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

• Hi again! i have draft for a new Neanderthal lead section here:User:Wikirictor/sandbox. Would be nice if you have a look. ATBWikirictor (talk) 23:39, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Suggestion

This is kind of a crazy suggestion, but bear with me. Why don't you ask a fucking biologist about it rather than edit this encyclopedia as if you were one. Just an idea. Sally T (talk) 19:40, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Templeton and Graves are fucking biologists, so are the dozens of other biologists who I've cited on the talkpage. And aren't you yourself an English teacher of sorts Mike?·maunus · snunɐɯ· 07:17, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Templeton and Graves are both hostile towards the race concept. Can you reference "0.25 Fst" being applied anywhere outside Templeton and Graves applying it to humans? No, because it's academic fraud. You edit the article by cherry picking academic frauds who fabricate a conclusion you like. You are an utter disgrace. In fact American anthropology since Boas is one long running joke. One that isn't funny. Sally T (talk) 08:34, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, they are "hostile" because it is wrong, as most geneticists agree. As for the chery picking of frauds, I think we have seen enough of that from you and your pioneer funded alt-right friends that we don't really need to take your accusations that seriously.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 10:42, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Latin American 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Latin America/The 10,000 Challenge ‎ has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Misplaced Pages:The 10,000 Challenge and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Brazil, Mexico, Peru and Argentina etc, much like Misplaced Pages:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Latin American content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 350 articles in just six days. If you would like to see this happening for Latin America, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Latin America, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant!. Thankyou.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:48, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

English language

Hi, this sentence in the lead "its vocabulary is primarily influenced by other Germanic and Romance languages, particularly by the French language" is wrong, since the Germanic vocabulary in English isn't there because of other Germanic languages, but because English is a Germanic language itself. Better would be: The English language has a considerably larger amount of Romance vocabulary than other Germanic languages, because many English words are French loanwords. Its grammar and core vocabulary, however, are Germanic. Also, the languages English is related to still are not mentioned in the lead even though you wrote it on the talk page.TheLusatian (talk) 01:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

No. In addition to Norman French, English has absorbed vocabulary (including core vocabulary) from North Germanic languages as well as from Low German. But I will work on the wording today, see if you like it.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 05:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

ok and please also write about the related languagesTheLusatian (talk) 06:17, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

I mentioned Frisian, do you think it is necessary to mention wider than that?·maunus · snunɐɯ· 06:42, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

at every other language article there are more languages mentioned in the lead. please write one sentence about related languages and in a second sentence the vocabulary.TheLusatian (talk) 06:53, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Another project

Hey... I was just thinking, I hope you're not chapped about the FAR/FARC of... what article was it? I don't recall... I can be harsh sometimes; perhaps a little too harsh... And the reason I dropped by here was to say that I'm considering working on two projects. The first I've already told you about. The second would be Social constructionism.. although I might wanna work on something not quite so broad... perhaps academic writing... yes, that one looks somewhat more manageable.. Anyhow, lemme know if you wanna chip away at something together. Tks.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 02:47, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

@Lingzhi: I am neither chapped nor miffed, I was a little worried you might have been by my own harshish words in the discussion of "decorative" quote boxes. I am sort of taking a Wikibreak, and I have an article Tycho Brahe up for GAR so I should be working on that firstly (but I have to pull myself together and go to the library etc.). I think Social Constructionism is a hard article to work on, not just because it is broad but also because it is one of those terms that have come to be defined mostly by its critics (many of whom never understood what it meant in the first place). I have it on my watchlist and may be inspired to work on it when I see you doing something to it. ;)·maunus · snunɐɯ· 06:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Progress on that page probably won't be a straight path, but circling back and forth improving things. I may not choose that one as it may be a bit of a steep climb. Other pages related to rhetoric etc. may present a smoother course... But if I edit there, and you see me making mistakes, please do jump in. :-) Later  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 09:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Blog

En tu blog (cuyo link das en tu pagina de usuario) hay un apartado que dice about me (sobre mi) y aparte de los comentarios hay una foto de una persona, pero parece una pintura, pregunto: ¿Eso es una foto tuya o es una pintura? Saludos --112.210.5.224 (talk) 16:33, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Es una foto de mi enfrente de una pintura.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 17:18, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Bringing Champollion to FAC

Hello there, while reading the Champollion article and then its GA review (yes I read old GA reviews...), I stumbled upon what you wrote: "So if you or anyone else is interested in nominating it I would be supportive as long as I can focus on sourcing and content and someone else focuses on the formalities". I happen to think the Champollion article is close to FA quality, in addition I have a bit of experience in the matter with 5 FA articles under my belt. I thus propose that we do the final FA push, if you agree I will scan and fix the article for MOS issues (e.g. isbn lacking on books, check for double wl etc.) in the next few days and then post it with you as FAC. I might also be able add a few sources, to avoid over-reliance on Adkins & Adkins, which could attract criticism (alternatively I can send you the sources as you said you are ok with concentrating on content). What do you think? Iry-Hor (talk) 09:10, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I am game. Thanks for looking at it and being willing to work on it with me.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 09:50, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Ok nice! I will start with isbn stuff, pretty obvious and tedious but must be done. I have seen a few facts that are not referenced, e.g. the fact that Champollion's father was a drunkard. Might be worth browsing google books for references here. I will do so in any case. Iry-Hor (talk) 10:24, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I should have access to both Adkins & Adkins and Robinson and if need be also Hartleben at my university library. Just put in CN tags where you think they are needed then we can supply them as we go along. I should mention that I will be traveling from next sunday and two weeks on, so my preferred time frame for nominating would be early december.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 10:36, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

No worries about the time, I would rather have it done in months and pass than go to FAC in a week and fail. My main worry is the over-reliance on Adkins, I just hope we could have a more diversified background of sources, as this is sometimes brought up at FA. Since Young's contribution to Champollion is still a matter of debate, we will need to make sure the article is really neutral there (that does not necessarily mean giving equal weight to all academic opinions on the matter, rather giving a weight proportional to academic consensus, while mentioning dissenting opinions). I will see if I can find sources in the Champollion article of Redford's Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. Iry-Hor (talk) 14:12, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I think Adkins and Robinson are mostly in agreement about the relative contributions of Young and Champollion - as you know Robinson also wrote (first) a biography of Young so his perspective is better informed relative to Young than the Adkins' is. Hartleben is a hard source to use well since while it is extremely detailed it sometimes mixes hearsay and hagiography with fact and it is hard to disentangle - however because of its monumental status untill the recent biographies it may merit more citations than it currently has.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 14:26, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

So I have just squeezed out as much info as I could from Redford's Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, notably a few more facts about various professional appointments that Champollion received. I think the relative (small) role of Young is well represented in the article, even Bianchi says that modern consensus is that Champollion owed very little to Young's work, if anything. In any case, I am just trying to have more diversity in the sources. Also I am not sure if the Weissbach sources can be deemed academic and reliable? Iry-Hor (talk) 16:42, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't think being academic is a requirement for sources, but I do think Weissbach is sufficiently relkiable for non-controversial stuff. I haven't seen her really contradicting anything found in the better biographies, though her work is a little more prone to a sensationalist tone.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 16:45, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Ok perfect, so now I will see if I can get some more info from the French article, in particular more sources. The (English) article is really good overall, I think it will ultimately pass FA. Iry-Hor (talk) 12:48, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Maybe you want to request semi-protection for this page?

Clearly Mikemikev is vandalizing as an IP. Maybe consider semi-protection. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:17, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Maunus. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Logan Article

Hello. You undid my edit on Logan (film) due to lack of consensus but we had WP:3O. Kailash29792 agreed with adding the image.CerberaOdollam (talk) 14:07, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

I agreed to let the image stay if sources were placed next to the text (like the image here). Kailash29792 (talk) 14:10, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

CerberaOdollam (talk · contribs) I do not see Kailash297292 agreeing to include it. I see him requesting sources demonstratin that the picture is famous and significant. I have not seen you produce any such sources. They are absolutely necessary for your proposed fairuse rationale to be acceptable.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 14:12, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

But we already have 3 reliable sources here and I can insert more credible sources too.CerberaOdollam (talk) 14:31, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

I dont think they are the kind of sources that establish notability. They are just par of the movie's hypemachine. We are not here to publish advertisements for moviecompanies.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 14:32, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

"promoting" white supremacism

Link to exact quote in those articles where it says that. I'll be waiting. Thanks. Bulldog123 22:25, 2 December 2016 (UTC)