Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by EdwardsBot (talk | contribs) at 17:23, 22 August 2012 (→Your Credo Reference account is approved: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!!! Pull up a chair, let's have a nice chat. I'm glad you called. I'll put the kettle on.
SilkTork

I will listen to you, especially when we disagree.

— Barack Obama

To do

Dylan Thomas review

We were hoping for a fair GA reviewer, and I'm sure the whole team will be glad to see that you have picked this one up, especially with your interest and knowledge on the subject. Please don't pull punches, but if you could give us time to answer your issues I am sure we could set this up as a GA great article. Cheers FruitMonkey (talk) 00:19, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

My primary aim is always to get an article to GA status, and I'm prepared to expend some time and effort getting it there if it looks possible. I don't regard GAN as an exam to be passed by the nominator - I see the whole process as a collaborative effort at improving articles for the general reader. As such, I will extend reviews for as long as needed, provided progress is being made and there is reasonable expectation that an article will meet GA criteria without undue effort or time. At this moment I fully expect that the article will be listed, and I don't anticipate too many problems, certainly nothing that a team of enthusiastic editors can't solve! I never hold my punches - the point of GAN and FAC is that someone who has not been involved in editing the article will examine the article with fresh and critical eyes, and so pick up stuff that has been overlooked. SilkTork 08:33, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi SilkTork, I've done some work on the article to address some of your concerns, hope they go someway to plug the gaps you rightly pointed out. I'm off line for the next week on holiday in a wi-fi free corner of West Wales, so I will be quiet for a while. I have already mentioned to other editors the size of the 'death' section. "Celebrity" or controversial deaths are often allowed their own article, so I don't think it would hurt to copy the entire death section, with some aftermath to a new article (Death of Dylan Thomas) and then shave the 'death' section by half in the Dylan Thomas article. Martinevans thinks that Thomas is not a big enough fish to deserve his own death section, ...but if people are writing books about it, I think it would be accepted. Yours, FruitMonkey (talk) 21:02, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

That is certainly worth giving some serious consideration. As regards none availability of wi-fi, check your smart phone - most will act as portable wi-fi. I take my laptop and use my phone to connect to the internet when I travel. I went up in my loft yesterday to dig out some books. I found a couple, but couldn't find the main collected works, nor any biography. Either they're up there in some box, or they're at my ex-wife's house. I'll check out my local library tomorrow. Have fun in West Wales. SilkTork 21:14, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

You have a smart phone! There's posh. FruitMonkey (talk) 22:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

£10 a month, includes phone (HTC Wildfire), unlimited internet, and more minutes and texts than I'll ever use. Cheap as chips! Certainly cheaper to use than my first ever top up mobile over 15 years ago! Tidy! SilkTork 22:44, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Takashi Yanase

Although information in English may seem to show that he has done nothing more than create Anpanman, professionally he has done more but also his life goes beyond that, so I think he should have his own article. For example, he was in charge of the creation of creating anti-Chinese propaganda during WWII. He didn't create Anpanman propaganda, so that information would be out-of-place to add to this article however, for an article about him as a person it should be there.

I originally searched for him to find information about his LIFE and the fact that it took me to a redirect to the Anpanman page was frustrating and obnoxious because it's not the same thing. Redirects to pages that do not give the information that redirecting implies can be found on the other page is one of the worst parts of Misplaced Pages and one that I think is not given enough consideration. There are other examples of this in which there is no mention at all of the redirected topic, but in this case I still think his fame warrants an article. The issue is most likely related to a lack of English-language information rather than lack of fame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.83.129.3 (talk) 00:58, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Because the article does not meet our inclusion criteria, I have again redirected Takashi Yanase to the nearest appropriate article - Anpanman, and I have now semi-protected the redirect to prevent edit warring. If you wish to spend some time working on the material, and finding reliable sources, I would be willing to userfy the material for you - this is, to copy it onto a sub-page in your user account. Currently you are using IP accounts - that is not a problem, as you would be able to edit from any IP account in the sub-page I would create, but you might consider registering an account for greater accountability and stability. Let me know. SilkTork 23:52, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about the revert. I was not attempting to edit war, but I wanted to review what was on the original page since I did not write his article. If there are no sources in English (or I don't have them), is it impossible to show notability for the English Wiki? He is clearly notable in Japan and he has an article in Japanese, but if the sources are in Japanese are they nonverifiable in the English version? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.83.129.3 (talk) 01:34, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Non English sources are acceptable, though it is generally expected that a topic which is notable enough for the English Misplaced Pages would have sources relevant for the audience. That is, a person a company which may be of interest to people in Japan, may not be of interest to people in America or England: "The source's audience must also be considered. Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, national, or international source is necessary." I would suggest that you would be able to mention Takashi Yanase in the Anpanman article as the creater, and add a certain amount of useful and interesting information to that article based on your Japanese source, and linking to that source. SilkTork 10:29, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

GAN for Impulse Control Disorder

Hello! I actually found your name on the 'Good Article nomination page'. I understand that with all these articles waiting, i should probably wait for my turn but I would Really appreciate it if you could have a look at the artcile on Impulse control disorder as well, that I elaborated recently. This is actually for a class project, and the class is ending by the end of the coming week. I would totally understand it if you refuse, but would really appreciate it if you could help me out :) Regards! Zoono92 (talk) 05:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

YRC Arbcom

Just in case you miss it; I'd be interested in your thoughts regarding this: . It might be better to chat about it here (?) or somewhere alternative to the request page rather than extend that page too much :D Up to you! --Errant 11:05, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll respond there as I don't think there is much to say. SilkTork 11:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Well; I could collate all the evidence of the various players and put it somewhere - perhaps several RFC/U's and some AN/I threads. All of which will probably come to pass anyway (by one or more of the entrenched editors). But the point I was making that there is a wide ranging clash here where we have several factions of editors who simply don't like each other much - and have become focused on the politics of that dispute. The Arbitration cases such as BLP, Jayen, Fae and now Rob (to name just recent examples) are simply the result of those factions manoeuvring someone into the firing line. I could post evidence of this ongoing battle - but it's rather self-evident (or at least seems so) and I can't realistically see which dispute resolution mechanism to use where I could present a problem involving multiple (as in 10's of editors) over a period of several years, involving private information as well. --Errant 15:59, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

We have an ArbCom request regarding the behaviour of an individual. Some Committee members find that the case is so clear cut that they are talking of a summary motion. My feeling is that the community should be allowed to finish their discussion regarding YRC. Your point appears to be that the case is more complex than appears, and that you wish ArbCom to look into the behaviour of several people. That sounds like a slightly different situation to the one ArbCom have been asked to look into. I would suggest that perhaps you might consider drawing up a separate request, naming the parties you feel are involved. Such a request could be considered separate from this request, and regardless of the outcome of this present request, or indeed separate from any decision the community make regarding YRC. SilkTork 17:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Voice recording

SilkTork, I'm back. And I've uploaded a file of Thomas reading "and death shall have no dominion" from the sample you found. Will you have a listen and tell me what you think. I've never uploaded a file recording before, and although he sounds like he's reading from a bath tub, it may be better than nothing. Cheers, FruitMonkey (talk) 16:12, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I'm reading through the books I've got from the library. I've glanced now and then at the article and it's developing well. I think that it should pass criteria without too much extra editing. I'm having a thought about the balance between comprehensive (which is a FA criteria) and broad coverage (a GA criteria). I should be ready soon to make a decision regarding referencing and coverage in a day or two. I may do a bit of tidying to bring it into line, but as I say I think not much - if anything - may be needed. SilkTork 14:35, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Your Credo Reference account is approved

Good news! You are approved for access to 350 high quality reference resources through Credo Reference.

• Fill out the survey with your username and an email address where your sign-up information can be sent.
• If you need assistance, ask User:Ocaasi.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Credo article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Credo pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Credo accounts/Citations.
• Credo would love to hear feedback at WP:Credo accounts/Experiences
• Show off your Credo access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Credo_userbox}} on your userpage
• If you decide you no longer can or want to make use of your account, donate it back by adding your name here

Thanks for helping make Misplaced Pages better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 17:23, 22 August 2012 (UTC)