Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Enkyo2 (talk | contribs) at 20:50, 18 February 2010 (→ArbCom process: notification). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Status: Unknown

If you are here because of a vandalism notice and the edit you are responding to came with the (HG) tag in the page history, keep in mind that this edit was made while I was on vandalism patrol. While I am responsible for the edit, I probably am not directly involved with the article in question and I probably made the edit rather quickly. If you think that your edit was correct, try again with a detailed edit summary and a reference for verification before leaving a message here. If the notice had no tag or the (TW) tag, then please disregard this message.

Welcome to my talk page. Please adhere to the talk page guidelines and particularly the following: Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page. Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end. Please specify a descriptive subject or headline for a new topic and separate subtopics by ===heading=== lines, if needed. Please indent your posts with one more ":" than what you are replying to, i.e. begin with ":" if replying to an existing topic and "::" if replying to a reply. I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply. ⇒ Start a new Talk topic.

Cowboy Bebop

Ok, but it is also like that in the Neon Genesis Evangelion (anime) article. There are tons of citations in the beginning of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.224.84.185 (talk) 07:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

It's best not to use other anime articles for comparison as they're all at different stages of development and quality. One example you might look at is Serial Experiments Lain which is one of the few series articles to become a Featured Article. We also look to the Anime and Manga manual of style for our direction on series articles. though it's rather long and detailed, it's pretty helpful. Evangelion and Cowboy Bebop are both C-Class, which means they're still pretty rough; they both need a lot of work so your help is appreciated! --~~

Glad to be of assistance! If there's anything you could think of for me to help besides the given recommendations, please feel free to let me know. There are a lot of peacock terms in the beginning of the "NGE" article, so if you want to go ahead and remove those, that would be great! Thanks for your advice and help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.224.84.185 (talk) 07:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, a lot of the NGE articles have a lot of drama among the regular editors, so I try to stay out of it. >.> --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 08:49, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

/me sighs

If I include the terms without references, everyone will jump on me as a crazed fan that should be shot like Old Yeller. If I include the terms with references, people will still criticize me as cherry-picking or flimsy sourcing. If I include the terms with a lot of references, now I'll be criticized for stuffing the intro and overdoing. If I don't include the terms at all, I do readers a massive disservice by omitting the out of universe context. I can't win!

'Shuzan held up his staff and waved it before his monks. "If you call this a staff," he said, "you deny its eternal life. If you do not call this a staff, you deny its present fact. Tell me just what do you propose to call it?"'...

--Gwern (contribs) 19:45 21 January 2010 (GMT)

Seriously, it's like they like the C-Class articles and don't want them to change. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 21:20, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Ironically, Serial Experiments Lain has been demoted... so let's see our example would actually be Tokyo Mew Mew. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 22:25, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Ping

I have sent you an e-mail. --Tenmei (talk) 00:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

In the context of an edit philosophy made explicit on your userpage, I find myself wondering about the extent to which I have routinely conflated references and explanations?

Your more nuanced view seems to be something like links ≤ references ≤ explanatory prose?

I wonder if simply acknowledging your hortatory list becomes a challenge to create one of my own:

1. Yes – Verifiable sources: everything must be sourced

2. Yes – Consensus: in WP decisions, consensus rules

3. Yes – Time: Not everyone has it

4. Yes – Civility: No matter what transpires, keep in mind WP:Good Faith and don't presume bias or malicious intent

5. Yes – Communication: Open and clear communication equals progress, sloppy or no communication equals conflict

6. Yes – "The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing."

Some of your sentences which were especially compelling, e.g., "Use links as references, not as explanations." In other words: "xplanation through clear reasoning is the key to better understanding." --Tenmei (talk) 17:18, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad you appreciate it. The list was first brought about by some of my early conflicts with other editors. I've since updated it, but I didn't want to forget what it's like to be new to Misplaced Pages. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 18:46, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments, your time and your consideration. As a gesture of appreciation, may I share a rhetorical question from the Analects of Confucius: "Is it not pleasant to learn with a constant perseverance and application?"

Please contact me using Misplaced Pages's e-mail function. --Tenmei (talk) 23:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your RfA Participation

Kraftlos - Thanks for your participation in my recent successful RfA. Although you reluctantly did not express confidence or trust in me, the community did and as you are an equal part of that community, deFacto your confidence and trust in me is much appreciated. As a new admin I will try hard to keep from wading in too deep over the tops of my waders, nor shall I let the Buffalo intimidate me.--Mike Cline (talk) 10:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I hope there's no hard feelings and good luck with being an Admin. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 12:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

reply to question

Ja, my pet who unfortunately died recently :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lunakeet (talk • contribs) 20:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

My condolences, I know how that feels. I'm on parakeet #4, you get attached to the little guys. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 20:37, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom clerks' noticeboard

Is this something you need to know? Your name is included in a new posting at Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Clerks Noticeboard#Discussion/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Tang Dynasty? As for what happens next, we'll see? --Tenmei (talk) 08:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

As you know, ArbCom remedies in Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty implied a multi-step process; however, no protocols for confirming mentors were suggested. In the absence of specifics, User:Mattisse/Plan was taken as an arguably relevant procedural model. Accordingly, a draft plan and list of mentors was e-mailed to each ArbCom member and redundantly posted at WP:AC/CN. That seems not to have worked.

I have now sought "approval" at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification#Tang Dynasty. This message is necessary because the standard template requires me to confirm notifying you. --Tenmei (talk) 20:50, 18 February 2010 (UTC)