→off-topic, nonproductive discussion: new section |
Captain Screebo (talk | contribs) comments read, blanked section, not interested in further discussion, thanks, Bus, stop! |
||
Line 235: | Line 235: | ||
''Saeed:'' No. I would use the cite book template in the article. The fields would auto arrange. --''[[User:Saeed.Veradi/About me|Saeed]]'' [[File:Kopete icon.png|{{#iferror: {{#expr:20 > 0 }} |20|20{{#if:20|{{#iferror: {{#expr:20 > 0 }}||x20}}px|px}}}}|link=User talk:Saeed.Veradi|User talk:Saeed.Veradi]] 11:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC) |
''Saeed:'' No. I would use the cite book template in the article. The fields would auto arrange. --''[[User:Saeed.Veradi/About me|Saeed]]'' [[File:Kopete icon.png|{{#iferror: {{#expr:20 > 0 }} |20|20{{#if:20|{{#iferror: {{#expr:20 > 0 }}||x20}}px|px}}}}|link=User talk:Saeed.Veradi|User talk:Saeed.Veradi]] 11:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC) |
||
== off-topic, nonproductive discussion == |
|||
Captain Screebo—I think that your posts at the Adam Levine entry at the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Adam_Levine BLP Noticeboard] are off-topic to a not insignificant degree. I'm concerned about the following: |
|||
''"…let's start handing out the yellow stars again shall we?"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard&diff=443201956&oldid=443199616]'' |
|||
''"…you are doing the work of the anti-semitic brigade…"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard&diff=443201956&oldid=443199616]'' |
|||
''"Saying a jew is a jew, no matter what, whether practising or just descended from Jewish ancestry, is reminiscent of the criteria used by Nazi Germany to differentiate between Aryans and non-Aryans…"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard&diff=443350814&oldid=443340716]'' |
|||
''"…this behaviour is demonstrated by both pro- and anti-semitic povs…"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard&diff=443350814&oldid=443340716]'' |
|||
The above sorts of statements don't strike me as particularly productive. [[Antisemitism]] is not under discussion. [[Nazi Germany]] is not under discussion. Under discussion is/was whether Adam Levine should be described as Jewish in his article. Also whether he should be placed in "Jewish" Categories and if so which one(s)? Adam Levine is a ''"singer-songwriter"'' according to his article. I fail to see the point of bringing up the above references, even if discussing his potential Jewishness. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 17:54, 9 August 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:56, 9 August 2011
Anonymous MBW contribution!?!
I have deleted this information as it was: unsolicited; in the wrong place; and falls foul of WP:BLP.
Thank you for your very accurate work.
Thanks for editing the article "Hank Skinner". I had started this article several years ago and it has now grown up a lot. I live in Panama and I am also teaching English. With my students, we often publish articles, mostly in Spanish but sometimes we create some in English, and I would be glad to submit them to you for review: For instance this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peristeria_elata or this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopoldo_Fern%C3%A1ndez_%28Cuban_humorist%29 Have a nice week. We are all interested in making Wikipedia better. --Adumoul (talk) 12:39, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
- Glad to be of service, I tend to end up editing articles that I am drawn to reading for one reason or another, and generally try to fix grammar, syntax, punctuation and other stuff like references, links or pure rubbish. Well, I do remember trawling through Hank Skinner late into the night, so your comments are appreciated.
- I will try to have a look at the articles you propose sometime soon. Captain Screebo (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Welcoming
When welcoming people on Wikipedia with a blank user talk page, be sure to check to see whether they are actually new or not--the easiest way is to see if their talk page has a "History" tab in the upper right corner. User:Neptunekh2, for instance, has about 8 times more edits than you do yourself; however, they have a tendency to blank their user pages after they've read messages. Just a tip for the future--thanks for your work on Wikipedia. Qwyrxian (talk) 16:51, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
- Oh dear, I came across this user at the help desk wishing to insert incorrectly sourced trivia into an article and complaining about an editor's reverts. After visiting their user page and talk page I naively assumed that it was someone who had mistaken WP for MySpace, judging by their user page, and also figured they needed a little guidance as they have a userbox saying that they have Aspergers Syndrome. I figured that they had gone mad creating their user page and then edited to their heart's content last night.
- It had never occurred to me that people go around blanking their talk pages! So far, I have seen archiving all over the place and, effectively, it was the blank talk page that led me to conclude bla bla bla. How did you happen across this? Are you a patroller of sorts? And how come this user is still on Wikipedia? Apparently they spam people's talk pages, continually add unreferenced material, ignore all messages/warnings and create loads of wierd categories that should be deleted.
- A case in point here, have a look please, I have just installed Twinkle, I would assume that this could be immediately nominated for deletion or rollbacked, although I hesitate as I would rather read the guidelines a few times and ask for a third opinion than stomp all over people's well-intended contributions. Looking forward to your feedback. CaptainScreebo Parley! 18:12, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
- As you pointed out, the user has stated that he has Asperbergers. This is, apparently, what compels the user to routinely ask multiple different people and the Help desk the same question. Any time he receives a helpful response from one person, this leads him to add that helpful person to a list of people he thinks it's okay to ask any question about in the future. He has been told many times not to ask multiple people the same question, but the message isn't getting through. I vaguely recall that he once said that if he doesn't receive an answer right away (which, of course, isn't possible on Wikipedia), he needs to ask someone else. In my opinion, the user is rapidly approaching the boundaries of WP:COMPETENCE and WP:NOTTHERAPY. While many editors, including myself, try to accommodate the idiosyncrasies of users, we do eventually have to draw a line and say "We understand you're trying to contribute helpfully, but it appears that you just aren't able to, our apologies". I'm going to send a query to Elen of the Roads, who is an admin and Arbcom member, who has interacted with him quite a lot, and has, recently, been showing signs stepping up warnings to him.
- Regarding some of the other points....I went ahead and nominated that category for deletion--as I said on the deletion discussion page, with only 10,000 Jews in Peru, I find it highly unlikely that enough of them later emigrated to the US and also became notable enough to have articles for that category to ever be populated.
- Regarding blanking of talk pages, it is okay for users to do so, even if they don't use archiving, per WP:BLANK. Some people, like myself, consider it to actually be a problem, especially for users receiving warnings/messages of concern, but it is part of our user page policy.
- Regarding me...I do vandalism/recent changes patrol. I also have a fairly large watchlist, that includes a fair number of user talk pages. I'm not sure, but I think the first time became aware of Neptunekh2 is when I saw him post the exact same message on two different talk pages I stalk. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:14, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- Right, thanks for your detailed reply, starting by your last point, I would be inclined to agree about WP:BLANK, warnings and suchlike should have some sort of permanence as it's far too easy to just dismiss anything and evrything by blanking the page, when I started to look at the diffs of the talk page I was like "whoa, this person is a serious pain in the anatomy".
- Good for the category, in fact could you look here, I'm not sure if I did this right as your deletion request shows up on the Categories for discussion board and mine doesn't, although I used Twinkle to nominate it for speedy deletion (considering this to be an unpopulated category and highly unlikely to ever have enough notable people to fill it). I posted some stuff on the talk page, should the user/creator be informed? I thought that they would automatically receive some sort of message?
- Finally I noticed Elen of the Roads over on the help desk and elsewhere getting a bit irate with this person's posting of the same question to multiple places, probably a good thing to get them involved as they seem to have a lot of experience with this user. Cheers! CaptainScreebo Parley! 14:17, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hi pet:) Thanks for trying to help Neptunekh out. There's nothing wrong with welcoming someone who appears to be a newbie - I'd rather err on the side of good faith most of the time. They (I think this editor is female, but I'm not 100% sure) have been around for a reasonable time, but I think part of the presentation of their Aspergers leads to a kind of Groundhog Day effect, and they keep forgetting they have been told something. The desire to categorise everything is I believe totally characteristic of the Autism spectrum, but they do come up with some doozies. If you read the questions, they are actually very nervous about getting reverted - but because they never remember what anyone said (would help if they didn't blank their talkpage - I'll try telling them again) they get it wrong loads of the time. I do get a bit irate - I'm not sure if they warrant any kind of action other than warnings, but they will probably contact you. If they do, check their contribs - they usually also post to helpdesk. Other than that, it's up to you if you want to continue answering, or if you think they are a bit of a nuisance and want to tell them to stop. Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:35, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the input, Elen. About the category, Captain Screebo, your way was fine. I actually nominated it for deletion using a CfD discussion (that's a slower, more involved process), while you used speedy deletion. For some reason, I was thinking that there wasn't an appropriate speedy deletion rationale, but you found it correctly. Both categories will likely be deleted, yours will just be deleted faster. Qwyrxian (talk) 21:44, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- First off, thanks to both of you, I have started to come across editors who are willing to help, reply, assume good faith etc. and it makes the whole thing a lot less bewildering, and is frankly highly encouraging, as initially one can get the idea that Wikipedia is full of trolls, bad faith editors or just IP drive-by editors (as one editor with a Bugs Bunny style user name insisted on using in an ongoing dispute, where incivility and assume the other editor is an a*hole prevailed).
- I do waste hours reading all of this archived stuff but then again I generally have a good laugh doing so, I think what came above might be from the Lamest edit wars that I read a couple of days ago.
- Back to business, Elen, I kind of figured that this person, definitely she as defined by userbox but also hair is brunette, not a lot of guys go round saying "I'm a sexy brunette" ;-), had some sort of attention problem, I agree that this syndrome seems to manifest itself in an obsessive-compulsive disorder to classify things. I was actually planning to inform them that they had posted too much personal information in their user space and that I could quite probably identify them if I came to Vancouver, B.C., and hung out for a little while but this would seem to be futile as the person does not seem to take on board even the mildest of messages/warnings. Oh well, enthusiastic but misguided, what to do?
- @Qwyrxian, great, on Wikipedia there always seem to be at least two ways of doing the same thing, see here, these were replies to a user on the help desk at the same time, so edit conflict, but basically are WP:RA and WP:AFC the same thing or not. Apparently, yes they do the same thing, but the pages and the processes are not the same? (I think both would be suitable though in this case?!?).
- Tanks a lot, glad I got the CSD right, see you round. CaptainScreebo Parley! 22:19, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- No probs. I've just blocked someone for photoshopping actresses faces onto nudie pictures and adding them to articles, so I know what you mean about 'problem editors'. RA and AFC are slightly different - RA is 'why haven't you got an article on Foo', while AFC came in when anonymous editors lost the ability to create articles - they can contribute titles, sources even text, and have the article created for them by a registered editor. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:28, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hi pet:) Thanks for trying to help Neptunekh out. There's nothing wrong with welcoming someone who appears to be a newbie - I'd rather err on the side of good faith most of the time. They (I think this editor is female, but I'm not 100% sure) have been around for a reasonable time, but I think part of the presentation of their Aspergers leads to a kind of Groundhog Day effect, and they keep forgetting they have been told something. The desire to categorise everything is I believe totally characteristic of the Autism spectrum, but they do come up with some doozies. If you read the questions, they are actually very nervous about getting reverted - but because they never remember what anyone said (would help if they didn't blank their talkpage - I'll try telling them again) they get it wrong loads of the time. I do get a bit irate - I'm not sure if they warrant any kind of action other than warnings, but they will probably contact you. If they do, check their contribs - they usually also post to helpdesk. Other than that, it's up to you if you want to continue answering, or if you think they are a bit of a nuisance and want to tell them to stop. Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:35, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
People of Jewish Descent
1. I just wanted to say the this link says Eli Wallach has polish and Jewish ancestry: http://www.nndb.com/people/735/000022669/ Should that be noted in his article? Thanks! 2. Would it be ok to list Alyson_Hannigan under Category:American_people_of_Jewish_descent since it says she is Jewish on her mother's side? 3. Also is it ok to list Josh_Keaton under Category:American_people_of_Peruvian-Jewish_descent since his parents are both Peruvian and Jewish? Please give your opinions on these questions. Neptunekh2 (talk) 12:47, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- Commented out categories; replied at Wikipedia:Help_desk#People_of_Jewish_Descent. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 12:54, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
ON the BLP Board
Captain Screebo, I just clipped some of your text from your entry on the mojo gurus as it violates quite a few guidelines. (just to name a couple). Even if the gentleman you responded to is not who he says he is, it doesn't matter. Please don't repost that. Thanks 16:49, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I think you are being a bit over the top and totally misunderstood what I posted. I really don't think that pointing at all those policies is very useful either, in particular when you don't sign your posts, as is indicated to be good practice per WP:TALK.
- I posted that I was tired and off to bed (almost 1 a.m.) and this was an attempt at humour, it is not a personal attack on the OP or the writer(s) of the article, it is about the content and presentation of the article and not the contributor(s), did you bother to take a look? I did add WP:SPADE in my defence. Maybe I should have worded it "looks like it was written by a chimpanzee"?
- I am not trying to bite anyone, and referring to the person as Mister was a sign of respect, recognizing the fact that the person has probably been informed of COI and has had the intelligence to come to the right place instead of just editing away about themselves.
- So a late-night attempt at humour, maybe a bit flippant, but no biting or personal attacks going on here. CaptainScreebo Parley! 17:22, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Please don't troll my talk page, it is very immature. CaptainScreebo Parley! 19:02, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Edit warring at Dominique Strauss-Kahn (Result: no action)
Hello Captain Screebo. You appear to have violated 3RR, per WP:AN3#User:Captain Screebo reported by Mtking (talk) (Result: ). If you would add a comment there and agree to take a break from the article from a period of time (e.g. one week), and from any other articles about Strauss-Kahn, an admin might close the report with no action. EdJohnston (talk) 16:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- I have fully replied over at the AN3 with detailed reasons for why I think these reverts were exempt under BLP, that I was only trying to maintain consensus as expressed by at least 8 editors (against three persistent trivia-hounds), that I appealed for other editors to come over, no-one came so I was left on my own (all through my night) for 5 hours and so on. CaptainScreebo Parley! 11:07, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
DSK Admin discussion re: ownership, tag-teaming
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. See here. FatTrebla (talk) 10:04, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Chibiusa's age in Sailor Moon
The age of Chibiusa of Sailor_Moon in the manga should be mentioned in her article. I found a source that talks about her different ages in manga: Chibiusa goes through several different designs in the manga as she grows up, but she's almost always wearing some school uniform or another. She's also unusually short for her age, a point that you notice when she hangs around with anyone from her class. When Chibiusa first shows up she's in fourth grade at Juuban Elementary. During the Death Buster's arc she's elected class president of the fifth grade, and at the beginning of the Galaxia arc she and Hotaru are both in sixth grade (classes 1 and 3, respectively). Here's the source: http://www.chibimoon.net/mangaforms.html Neptunekh2 (talk) 20:41, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) You've been told that you have to ask this at the article's talk page. I see you did that on 19 May. You must now wait for someone there to discuss it. Sorry, but that's the way it works--sometimes, on Wikipedia, things take time. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- Neptunekh2, you may not remove other people's comments from talk pages that are not your own. Generally, you shouldn't even remove your own comments, because then if makes conversations not make sense. If Captain Screebo wishes to remove this section, xe may do so, but you may not.
AWB removing Wikify
Re [1]: This was done semi-automatically by AWB, as the software must have considered the article to be sufficiently wikified. As I'm checking around 500 links each evening, I don't have the time to go into the background of every page to verify each change, but put my trust in the software. This does lead to occasional mistakes, so if I do mess it up, please let me know so that I can avoid making the same mistake the following day (each link generally gets checked a few times before it's actually on the main page). Many thanks. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 18:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, no problem, I'm planning to put my name on the AWB list so I'll get to see how it works soon enough.
- I assumed it was a good faith removal, if you see the talk page here you'll see why I put the wikify tag. In fact I have come across a lot of articles about Japanese anime, Muslim law and now the Mongol Empire where people absolutely do not follow the WP:MoS concerning capitalization, italics for foreign words not in mainstream English, italics for book/film titles and so on. Sometimes you'll get the foreign word italicized in certain sections of the article and not others. This drives me a bit nutty because it is visually sloppy, it's one of the first things that jumps off the page at me. Anyway, I slapped the tag on as ancient Mongolian is not really my speciality so I'm hoping one of the contributors to that page takes it to heart to clean it up. CaptainScreebo Parley! 10:37, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Help me
I will accept your help. But if you want me to leave Wikipedia, I'll leave. But If I stay on wikipedia I will use Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith. Neptunekh2 (talk) 21:32, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, great! you replied. Thank you, as I said, nobody wants you to leave, people would just like you to channel your (immense) energy into positve contributions and not stuff that's just going to get deleted (and use up other editor's time instead of improving the encyclopaedia).
- There are several people involved, did you read the discussion at the Admin noticeboard concerning you? Elen, Qwyrxian, Blade and myself like you and think you mean well but sometimes get it wrong. Only, when we try to tell you what's not right or why this information can't be included you don't seem to listen.
- Okay, enough for now, who would you accept to help you? User:The Blade of the Northern Lights has offered to mentor you, Elen is a bit overworked, we would like to see you transform into a great Wikipedia editor, do you have a preference? (Random fact: I used to live in New Brunswick when I was a teenager). CaptainScreebo Parley! 21:50, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- Just wanted to echo you above; I'd love to be of whatever assistance I can be. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 22:04, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hey Blade, cool, I guess we just missed each other, I was over on your talk but the most important thing is Neptune we want you to stay and contribute positively to Wikipedia. CaptainScreebo Parley! 22:20, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- Just wanted to echo you above; I'd love to be of whatever assistance I can be. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 22:04, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
2 article that need work
Hi! I created 2 article about a city in Sierra_leone called Ballowharf and a mountain in Peru called Pitusiray. Both articles need work on them. Neptunekh2 (talk) 00:22, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm posting once and 3 questions day on Blade's page
I'm posting once and 3 questions day on Blade's page. I'm not posting all over the place anymore. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 21:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, good faith editor, there is other stuff but let's say for now that's great! CaptainScreebo Parley! 21:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you, Captain Screebo, for your recent helpful copyediting to the article, Santorum (neologism). Much appreciated. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 14:21, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- You're welcome, always something new and surprising to read/edit in the wierd world of Wikipedia. :) CaptainScreebo Parley! 16:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- And, hey, it was only moving a comma ;-) CaptainScreebo Parley! 17:22, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
FYI
I noticed you have been involved in a discussion about the example of Eskimo/Inuit on Wikipedia:Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality. I have simply removed this example from that page, and so resolved the issue. Debresser (talk) 11:15, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
- Very good, in fact, looking through the talk page archives I found that this discussion had already sort of taken place but I'm glad you removed it as it is not a clear-cut example. Eskimo is considered offensive by most Inuit, but Alaskan first nations people prefer Eskimo even if some of them are Inuit. Go figure and good move! Cheers. CaptainScreebo Parley! 19:45, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Bouygues
Just to clarify Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(linking) "There are exceptions ... where the links are in a table or in a list, as each table or list should stand on its own with its own independent set of links. But, of course, within each list only the first occurence should be linked" Imgaril (talk) 22:51, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Good, nice to know, I didn't have time to look for further information, but it was æsthetically unpleasing to just see the red links, much better and I wikilinked Alstom at the end of the business structure list so that all of the subsidiaries are linked to from that section. CaptainScreebo Parley! 09:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- diff yes that looks right now.Imgaril (talk) 14:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
WP:TWINKLE
Chzz ► 23:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Improving the article "Physics"
CaptainScreebo: Saeed while appreciating that you have a lot of enthusiasm for the subject and, quite possibly, a lot of knowledge, I would suggest that you make major edits/improvements(?) to the article in your userspace and ask someone to verify them there before sending them live. I have just spent the afternoon copyediting the small section, Physics#History, that you copyedited. I initially was going to reply to you about CAPITALS, see my edits or this article; disciplines, theories or beliefs do not take capitals unless they are at the beginning of the sentence (first word) or they contain someone's name, e.g. Newton's constant. To copyedit correctly:
- you need to understand some basic rules, like the one above;
- also you cannot cite Wikipedia as a source for itself;
- you need to learn how to format refs properly (see the talk page for two refs I removed as they just referred back to the article itself);
- it would be good to read the articles that connect to your subject to try to have the same tone, facts and so on;
- if you make a list and then bullet point it, the headings of your (bullet-pointed) list should match those that you have mentioned just beforehand and so on.
Please do not make further edits to this page without discussing here or on the talk page, and I would strongly advise you to make a draft in your userspace first. Thanks. CaptainScreebo Parley! 16:43, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Saeed: Dear Captain Screebo. Hi.
"quite possibly, a lot of knowledge"
- I have no knowledge. but I have studied a few years, so that I can someday improve this article.
About the useful info and advice on copy editing. I can use them.
- You are right. I thought the names of science fields are "names", and must be capital. I should've checked it in another article.
- You are right. I shouldn't cite Wikipedia. I should link to it.
- And not just these. I am a man full of mistakes. But I am also...
- present.
- able to learn.
- able to avoid future mistakes.
- able to correct my past mistakes.
"I have just spent the afternoon..."
- That's why no one can continue to help me. It takes time. I've spent three years. a few more weeks is no problem if the artlcle becomes a "good article" again.
"I have just spent the afternoon copyediting the small section, Physics#History, that you copyedited."
- Really thanks. But in none of us would copyedit it, It would be like this: no ref, no structure, no separation between Philosophy, astronomy and physics, no equal paragraph length for each time period, no global point of view, no understanding of the development of methodology, and no new information for anyone who reads it. It was a c-class section. but now it's better.
- I'll try to be responsible, learn, correct, and not repeat my mistakes. but making no mistakes = leaving the article in a full of mistake state.
"I would suggest that you make major edits/improvements(?) to the article in your userspace and ask someone to verify them there before sending them live."
- "Someone" is the key word:
- I have asked three people for review. All of them eventually left.
- It's hard to find anyone interested.
- There seems to be no one to help. Just take a look at the article history page. No one seriously edits this article. this article deserves more attension. If it's not getting it, that's because it's a hard to edit article. It neeeeeeeeds study. I have done that study, and I have been bothered seeing the article remaining in the same state for years.
- If no one is going to help, why not me?
- If you accept to help, I'll do it.
Thanks, --Saeed 20:24, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Relation between myth, religion, and Philosophy, in Physics#History
CaptainScreebo:
Please do not change the article again.
Let's ask Qwyrxian what he thinks of the changes.
Even if man used astrology, mythology and religion to understand the universe initially, this is a science article and you putting mythology back in is original research and POV.
Wikipedia has rules, I study mythology, spirituality and so on and am deeply interested in Oriental philosophy, mysticism = Siva, Taoism and so forth, but Wikipedia has rules, so I cannot say "the Universe spoke to me last night so incarnate intelligence exists", this is considered original research until it is backed up by verifiable sources.
Also, a sentence like: "For example, see atomism" is not correct English and not suitable for an encyclopaedia as a proper sentence, a sentence has a subject and a verb. You are obviously not a native English speaker, and this is nothing to hold against you, but for the moment, slow down, or you will find yourself being blocked for disruption. I am willing to help but you cannot equivocally make changes like you just did,[2], unlink perfectly good wikilinks and so on. It shows that you do not (fully) understand what you are doing. CaptainScreebo Parley! 20:39, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Saeed:
"Slow down"
- Ok. I'll REALLY slow down.
"Let's ask Qwyrxian what he thinks of the changes."
- I have already bothered him enough
- Asking a third person is good for a hard to solve discussion. I'm ready to accept your ideas if we can't come to a common conclusion.
- If you think that's really vital, go on.
- I'm online right now. so we can speed up the discussion: Saeed.Veradi@yahoo.com. I have gmail, live, ... accoutns too. just tell me what you prefer.
--Saeed 20:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
CaptainScreebo: Saeed, it is 11 o'clock at night here, I have been editing wP on and off for about 10 hours, there is no reference about mythology, I am trying to explain to you the workings of WP and verifiability and so on. This is a science article, you need to have a book which says "man's perception of the Universe, initially influenced by mythology and religion, progressivelly discovered philosophy which led to bla bla bal", which you don't.
I'm logging off, but I am willing to help if you slow down and ask for advice/help first. I have to sleep, feed my chickens, visit my daughter tomorrow and so on. Speak to you soon. CaptainScreebo Parley! 20:57, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Saeed:
"I am trying to explain to you the workings of WP and verifiability and so on. This is a science article and you putting mythology back in is original research and POV."
- That's not original research. This is the reference: "Pre-Socratic philosophers like Thales refused supernatural, religious or mythological explanations for natural phenomena and proclaimed that every event had a natural cause. Singer, C. A Short History of Science to the 19th century. Streeter Press, 2008. p. 35.
"I am willing to help if you slow down and ask for advice/help first"
- There is no hurry. and I definitely need your advice and help.
"Speak to you soon."
- Then please read this carefully. I spent three hours to write it, and it clarifies many things.
Thanks, --Saeed 23:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
CaptainScreebo: Saeed, it does not say "physics evolved from x which evolved from y which evolved from z which evolved from man's attempt to understand the universe through religion and mythology" so it is synthesis, it is OR, and please stop hassling people, you will be reported and get blocked if you are not willing to listen to what people are trying to tell you. CaptainScreebo Parley! 21:05, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Saeed:
"It does not say "physics evolved from x which evolved from y which evolved from z which evolved from man's attempt to understand the universe through religion and mythology" so it is synthesis" Here is more direct references with no synthesis:
- It wasn't my edit. It existed in the previous versions of the section, like this.
- It's not POV. It's not original research. It's not even synthesis. The evolution process you just mentioned has been deliberately discussed in every book about history of phylosophy that starts with pre-Socratic phylosophers.
- I can bring a lot of reference for such a highly popular topic. even if I couldn't, it's more rational to use the [citation needed] tag instead of reverting edits without reference.
Examples of references for the claim. Please read carefully.
- Bryan Magee, The story of phylosophy, . It explains this evolution process in full detail. especially read: Thales, From Copernicus to Newton, Francis bacon, and the whole 20 century chapter. I can bring quotations from the book if you like.
- Jostein Gaarder, Sophie's world, A story about history of phylosophy, ISBN 0297858815, 9780297858812. In the second chapter of So, the writer explains in detail, brings sufficient examples, and lists many other examples of "man's attempt to understand the universe through religion and mythology". In the chapter three, he explains how philosophy was evolved from mythology.
- Kathryn A. Morgan, From myth to phylosophy (click to read), page 30: "from myth to logos?". It criticizes the usual theory of "From myth to logos". but it doesn't completely reject it as you did. In fact it ensures us that such a theory is necessary.
- Frank Reynolds and David Tracy, Myth and philosophy (Click to read). It's a very popular textbook among scholars and students of this field. Page 95 talks about Myth, religion and Phylosophy in ancient Greek.
- Myth and philosophy, Lawrence J. Hatab Page 293 can also be useful.
- There are many more sources for mythos & logos theories. I wonder why it has no Wikipedia article. It's such a hot topic. If you read some of Plato's and Aristotle's writings in random you'll find them "not myth-free". It's in fact full of mythical characters and ancient Greek gods, and even some supernatural explanations. what remains myth-free is just their core theories.
"you will be reported and get blocked if you are not willing to listen to what people are trying to tell you."
- Am I not listening? you spent 10 hours editing Wikipedia until 11 at night. I spent six hours answering you in your talk page untill four in the morning (take a look at signature times). Don't you think that I "read" your text before I quote it and think about replying? Please be optimistic.
- Blocked? Take a look at my user-page. I'm a "retired" Wikimedian.
--Saeed 23:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Qwirxian: One small note (will try to look at article later): you can't hide behind the "retired" banner to keep from following policies. I mentioned before that you (Saeed) should probably be very wary of making such drastic changes; what may well happen is that someone may just revert your whole, hard work, since its too much at once. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Saeed: Policies are ok. Slow change is ok. Being reverted is ok. being blocked is ok. and I don't edit Physics until my discussion with captainScreebo comes to a conclusion.
You (Qwyrxian) added two citation-needed tags to the article. here (above) are five references for that. We are just discussing whether they are reliable and synthesis free before adding them to the article.
Qwyrxian:Is there a reason you're refactoring the posts to use a non-standard method (putting the person's name at the beginning and not using indentation? Qwyrxian (talk) 08:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Saeed: No. I would use the cite book template in the article. The fields would auto arrange. --Saeed 11:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)