Articles that you don't expect NOT to be in Wikipedia Options

[thekohser]

Just a thread to add those subjects where you fully expect there would have been a Wikipedia article about it, but there isn't.

Bob Welch songs:

* Sentimental Lady

* Hypnotized (the one made famous by Fleetwood Mac) (not this garbage)

Musical group:

* The Ebonys

Law firm:

* Jackson Lewis (over 500 attorneys)

[The Joy]

Gottlob Espenlaub

*Gottlob Espenlaub (T-H-L-K-D) (nothing there!)

[Firsfron of Ronchester]

I was quite surprised there was not only no article on the NTA Film Network (T-H-L-K-D), there actually was no mention of it, anywhere on Wikipedia (I remedied that last month). Wikipedia's strength is usually in pop culture, so you'd expect some sort of mention of a network with over 100 local stations and a television series which won an early Peabody Award.

[EricBarbour]

That's a good one. Espenlaub was a somewhat important figure in German aviation.
I've got a book about it, it mentions Espenlaub as a coworker with Lippisch.

I wonder...was there a bio about him on WP in the past, that someone deleted for
bizarre/no reason? Or perhaps because of his involvement with some nasty secret
Nazi projects during the war?

Anyway, he made bitchin' cars.
(IMG:http://i583.photobucket.com/albums/ss273/metasonix/es15.jpg)

[Casliber]

Cool! More DYKs a-coming...~~~~

[Lar]

That's a good one. Espenlaub was a somewhat important figure in German aviation.
I've got a book about it, it mentions Espenlaub as a coworker with Lippisch.

I wonder...was there a bio about him on WP in the past, that someone deleted for
bizarre/no reason? Or perhaps because of his involvement with some nasty secret
Nazi projects during the war?

Anyway, he made bitchin' cars.
(IMG:http://i583.photobucket.com/albums/ss273/metasonix/es15.jpg)

Those post war ones are nice (the one in back looks vaguely jag-etype-ish to me) but the prewar streamliners are very cool (for some reason they reminded me of Zeros due to the way the windows were done).

I agree, this is the sort of bio that one would think WP would have.

[Guido den Broeder]

* Myalgic encephalomyelitis

Then again, its absence is rather exactly what one would expect.

* Might and Magic Tribute

Could well be the longest running computer game fan project that is still making progress.

This post has been edited by Guido den Broeder:

[CharlotteWebb]

* Hypnotized (the one made famous by Fleetwood Mac) (not this garbage)

Greg, I'd nominate this as the most surprisingly constructive WR thread of the year. It seems like a dream.

I've been keeping a similar list of glaring omissions, mostly in plain sight. My favorite observation so far is that WP has no article discussing the interpretations of the notorious "wheel inside a wheel" mentioned in the book of Ezekiel.

I'm almost sure von Däniken speculated that the iron chariots of Canaan were fitted with wheels inside wheels, but I can't find a source for this. Apparently he's still alive so there exists an outside chance that I could contact him and get a statement to this effect, maybe an autograph too! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

Next on my list is Simón Radowitzky. I know bat-shit revolutionaries in latin america are a dime a dozen, but this guy was unique being from the Ukraine. He already has a WP article in German, Spanish, and Polish, but not in English.

Despite this the enwiki project still maintains the same air of cultish superiority which leaves ignorant readers and editors believing that la lingua anglofonica leads the wikisphere on every front and is very close to complete.

[zvook]

editors believing that la lingua anglofonica leads the wikisphere on every front and is very close to complete.

There's little doubt a WP functioning properly would still be in its growth phase even by the lights of the systemic bias of contributors. I have a stack of such articles, but I'm not sure what the point of this thread is except for

Cool! More DYKs a-coming...~~~~

Edit: Now with added growth phase

This post has been edited by zvook:

[Eva Destruction]

* Myalgic encephalomyelitis

Then again, its absence is rather exactly what one would expect.

Myalgic encephalomyelitis. The editor with the highest number of edits to it is, er, you.

[A Horse With No Name]

There is no article on the 1974 film version of Simon Gray's "Butley," which was directed by Harold Pinter and starred Alan Bates and Jessica Tandy. That's quite a pop culture gap.

[CharlotteWebb]

There is no article on the 1974 film version of Simon Gray's "Butley," which was directed by Harold Pinter and starred Alan Bates and Jessica Tandy. That's quite a pop culture gap.

I don't know if anybody else is familiar with a TV network called "This" (seriously), and they don't quite have access to the Ted Turner vault, but they do play a lot of old B-thru-Z-movies I had never heard of. Among the ones I recall watching, most of them lack a WP article.

It might be blaxploitation week right now. Yesterday I watched Slaughter starring former football player Jim Brown, and Miami Cops (which more like an urban spaghetti western) starring whatsizname who played Shaft.

Fascinating stuff, but where are the wiki-pages? Everybody keeps saying "pop culture" is WP's strong suit... well I pity the fool!

[Milton Roe]

* Myalgic encephalomyelitis

Then again, its absence is rather exactly what one would expect.

Myalgic encephalomyelitis. The editor with the highest number of edits to it is, er, you.

Yes, and Guido is spinning it as a giant WP conspiracy, when it in fact it really must be spun as a Canada vs. (UK and US) conspiracy, since the UK and US definitions don't recognize "myalgic encephalomyelitis." Worse still the "consensus document" from Canada about ME is symptom-driven: objective tests are not needed criteria. This is despite what you'll read on ME websites which claim that there are objective tests for ME. Even Canada recognizes none. So much for THAT consensus.

Beware any document labeled "consensus." That word means there is no consensus, else there would have been no reason to create the document and try to force one. There certainly is none here.

As for the giant conspiracy which covers up something that the WHO believed in, in 1969, well, science moves on. Once upon a time we didn't believe in continental drift, either. Even the guy who first came up with the serious idea for it, had no mechanism. If the mechanism was THAT obvious, how come Wegener didn't propose it? Answer: because it wasn't so obvious. That's progress. Once somebody had the mechanism, it was accepted.

We're still waiting for the mechanism of "chronic fatigue." Until it arrives, it will not be accepted science, no matter how many Canadians whine and demand consensus from the rest of the medical world.

[A Horse With No Name]

There is no article on the 1974 film version of Simon Gray's "Butley," which was directed by Harold Pinter and starred Alan Bates and Jessica Tandy. That's quite a pop culture gap.

I don't know if anybody else is familiar with a TV network called "This" (seriously), and they don't quite have access to the Ted Turner vault, but they do play a lot of old B-thru-Z-movies I had never heard of. Among the ones I recall watching, most of them lack a WP article.

It might be blaxploitation week right now. Yesterday I watched Slaughter starring former football player Jim Brown, and Miami Cops (which more like an urban spaghetti western) starring whatsizname who played Shaft.

Fascinating stuff, but where are the wiki-pages? Everybody keeps saying "pop culture" is WP's strong suit... well I pity the fool!

There is a guy on WP with the moniker of Lugnuts who spends too much time filling in gaps for obscure films. He is one of the better under-the-radar editors out there.

[CharlotteWebb]

There is a guy on WP with the moniker of Lugnuts who spends too much time filling in gaps for obscure films. He is one of the better under-the-radar editors out there.

I should make him a customized barnstar and a tire iron to go with it.

[A Horse With No Name]

There is a guy on WP with the moniker of Lugnuts who spends too much time filling in gaps for obscure films. He is one of the better under-the-radar editors out there.

I should make him a customized barnstar and a tire iron to go with it.

Really, you (or someone here) should nominate him for adminship. Unlike the Xeno or Guy Chapman types who do absolutely nothing of value, someone like Lugnuts is a real Net positive who is actually improving content without drama or error.

[EricBarbour]

Really, you (or someone here) should nominate him for adminship. Unlike the Xeno or Guy Chapman types who do absolutely nothing of value, someone like Lugnuts is a real Net positive who is actually improving content without drama or error.

Yep, all he's got to show for 3 years of hard work are a few BSes. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/yecch.gif)

That's another charming feature of WP: the slimy backstabbing bastards get all the power and attention,
while hardworking editors get nothing but a few thank-yous. (Just like real life.)

[Guido den Broeder]

* Myalgic encephalomyelitis

Then again, its absence is rather exactly what one would expect.

Myalgic encephalomyelitis. The editor with the highest number of edits to it is, er, you.

Hmm, that is CFS, not ME.
Not that my edits on that article helped, all 217 of them were reverted by the NHS during their case at the UK High Court.

This post has been edited by Guido den Broeder:

[Guido den Broeder]

Yes, and Guido is spinning it as a giant WP conspiracy, when it in fact it really must be spun as a Canada vs. (UK and US) conspiracy, since the UK and US definitions don't recognize "myalgic encephalomyelitis." Worse still the "consensus document" from Canada about ME is symptom-driven: objective tests are not needed criteria. This is despite what you'll read on ME websites which claim that there are objective tests for ME. Even Canada recognizes none. So much for THAT consensus.

I take it that you have not actually read the document. The Canadian consensus definition of ME/CFS (i.e. not of ME or CFS separately!) includes a protocol that describes what research needs to be done. The old Fukuda and Holmes definitions for CFS (we now have Reeves, that is 10 times as many patients) also explicitly state that patients need to be thoroughly medically examined. Obviously, no CFS definition recognizes ME, just like no definition of cancer or of a bicycle does. ME definitions recognize ME. There are UK (Ramsay) and Canadian (Hyde) definitions of ME.

As for the giant conspiracy which covers up something that the WHO believed in, in 1969, well, science moves on.

It certainly does. Wikipedia otoh only moves backwards.

We're still waiting for the mechanism of "chronic fatigue."

The mechanism of chronic fatigue is well known and has been for quite some time, in part thanks to ME researchers like Behan.

[A Horse With No Name]

Really, you (or someone here) should nominate him for adminship. Unlike the Xeno or Guy Chapman types who do absolutely nothing of value, someone like Lugnuts is a real Net positive who is actually improving content without drama or error.

Yep, all he's got to show for 3 years of hard work are a few BSes. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/yecch.gif)

That's another charming feature of WP: the slimy backstabbing bastards get all the power and attention,
while hardworking editors get nothing but a few thank-yous. (Just like real life.)

Oh, you are following the Majorly RfA, too? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

[EricBarbour]

Oh, you are following the Majorly RfA, too? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

Yep, and it's just increasing my cynicism to boilover levels.

Does he really think all this will be forgiven? Or has he been butt-kissing
for months, in preparation for his triumphant return to the Fold of Glory? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/yecch.gif)

Hmm, looks like the ultimate atrocity might come to pass.
Vote right now is 45-10-3.

I've long and vaguely suspected that Alex had a slight Wiki-whoring asshole complex.
After seeing this, I'm SURE of it. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/angry.gif)

[The Joy]

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/offtopic.gif)

[Milton Roe]

I've long and vaguely suspected that Alex had a slight Wiki-whoring asshole complex.
After seeing this, I'm SURE of it. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/angry.gif)

Sucks-up to be him. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/sad.gif) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/yecch.gif)

Hilarious that he asked me what I was doing wasting my time, here. Back at you, Alex. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

[A Horse With No Name]

Oh, you are following the Majorly RfA, too? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

Yep, and it's just increasing my cynicism to boilover levels.

Does he really think all this will be forgiven? Or has he been butt-kissing
for months, in preparation for his triumphant return to the Fold of Glory? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/yecch.gif)

Hmm, looks like the ultimate atrocity might come to pass.
Vote right now is 45-10-3.

I've long and vaguely suspected that Alex had a slight Wiki-whoring asshole complex.
After seeing this, I'm SURE of it. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/angry.gif)

Champagne time for you, Eric...the RfA is at 67%. Barring a St. Jude intervention, I suspect Alex won't be mopping up Wikipedia for another six months.

This post has been edited by A Horse With No Name:

[Sarcasticidealist]

I was surprised to see that there's no article for Scotty (Bulldog) Olson, a pretty famous flyweight boxer back in the eighties and nineties (especially so in my neck of the woods, but I'm told he was also the most popular fighter in Vegas for a time). It's a BLP that Wikipedia could probably do without, so I'm not complaining, but I'm surprised he's not in there.

[LessHorrid vanU]

There is no article on the 1974 film version of Simon Gray's "Butley," which was directed by Harold Pinter and starred Alan Bates and Jessica Tandy. That's quite a pop culture gap.

I don't know if anybody else is familiar with a TV network called "This" (seriously), and they don't quite have access to the Ted Turner vault, but they do play a lot of old B-thru-Z-movies I had never heard of. Among the ones I recall watching, most of them lack a WP article.

It might be blaxploitation week right now. Yesterday I watched Slaughter starring former football player Jim Brown, and Miami Cops (which more like an urban spaghetti western) starring whatsizname who played Shaft.

Fascinating stuff, but where are the wiki-pages? Everybody keeps saying "pop culture" is WP's strong suit... well I pity the fool!

Surely, the thing about true "pop culture" is that it only references the pop culture of "Now" - what was the pop culture of yesterday is now so much forgotten news. To re-interpret Andy Warhol, "In the future everyone will be famous for 15 minutes... and then consigned to oblivion as the next 15 minuter gets their go."

I had to undo some editors redirect of John Lennon's "How Do You Sleep?" article to a disambig page because there appears to be some C&W artist (extremely co-incidently surnamed McCartney, Mr Manager/Songwriter) who is/was having a big hit in those charts with a tune of the same name. In all honesty, the writer was unfamiliar with the Lennon track and wasn't aware of the nature of its origin and when advised wondered if it really was that notable being as Lennon and McCartney were hardly front page news these days... Of course, is my reverence to my pop culture icons obscuring the true worth of articles relating to them?

[Firsfron of Ronchester]

Surely, the thing about true "pop culture" is that it only references the pop culture of "Now" - what was the pop culture of yesterday is now so much forgotten news. To re-interpret Andy Warhol, "In the future everyone will be famous for 15 minutes... and then consigned to oblivion as the next 15 minuter gets their go."

I had to undo some editors redirect of John Lennon's "How Do You Sleep?" article to a disambig page because there appears to be some C&W artist (extremely co-incidently surnamed McCartney, Mr Manager/Songwriter) who is/was having a big hit in those charts with a tune of the same name. In all honesty, the writer was unfamiliar with the Lennon track and wasn't aware of the nature of its origin and when advised wondered if it really was that notable being as Lennon and McCartney were hardly front page news these days... Of course, is my reverence to my pop culture icons obscuring the true worth of articles relating to them?

Heh. Not in the news right now, so "not notable".

I've experienced the same thing with early television articles. "Never heard of it" seems to mean "not notable", even on articles that are fully referenced to books.

[sbrown]

Theres loads of people on German wikipeida not on the English one. First I hit using random page was Hans Walter Wolff

http://www.augsburgfortress.org/store/item...ibutorcode=2414

"Hans Walter Wolff is emeritus professor of Old Testament at the University of Heidelberg and the author of many widely used studies."

(The links wrong hes dead.)


This post has been edited by sbrown:

[thekohser]

No article about geographical feature Leverick Bay.

In my opinion, one of the most beautiful bays in the entire world, so maybe it's best that no Wikipediots become aware of it.

[One]

Law firm:

* Jackson Lewis (over 500 attorneys)

Holy cow, 41 offices! In fairness to Wikipedia, this firm (employment law) has apparently been growing very fast as the economy crumbles. Here's a nice list of other missing large lawfirms.

[Milton Roe]

Theres loads of people on German wikipeida not on the English one. First I hit using random page was Hans Walter Wolff

http://www.augsburgfortress.org/store/item...ibutorcode=2414

"Hans Walter Wolff is emeritus professor of Old Testament at the University of Heidelberg and the author of many widely used studies."

(The links wrong hes dead.)

If you die the link should quit working.

I keep thinking of George Carlin wanting to know if you die while "on hold," on the phone, if the little light goes out...

Seems like it should. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hmmm.gif)

[EricBarbour]

Lots of special-purpose vacuum tubes were made, mostly between WWII and 1960.
Most of them aren't on Wikipedia, except (at most) as passing mentions in related articles.
All of these were historically significant, many were used in early digital computers or radar.

Phasitron (in the 1950s, most of the FM broadcast transmitters in America used one.)

Zahl Tube (very important in early development of radar)

Trochotron (only mentioned in the Nixie tube article because I put it there long ago....)

Pixie tube (ditto)

Orbital-beam tube (mentioned in the Secondary Emission article, only because I put it there. Three of them were in the SCR-270 radar that gave early warning of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. I would call that "historically significant".)

Radechon (used as memory in the Rice R1 computer of 1959)

Graphecon

Scan converters (a variety of designs)

Alphechon (one of the world's rarest collectible tubes--used as memory in RCA's Spectra 70 computer system display terminals, all of which were junked in 1970-72.)

Sheet-beam tube

Square-law tube (extremely rare item, used only in tube analog computers)

There's an article about Robert von Lieben, but it barely mentions the amplifying tube he invented, at about the same time as deForest.

I'll probably think of others later.

Plus there were two monostable-multivibrator circuits often seen in early computers, that were tube-only: the sanatron and the phantastron. This guy is using a phantastron circuit for musical sound effects.

This is a pathetic list. Lots of errors and thousands of omissions.

Why don't I add the articles? Why should I, when some teenage RPGer
will just go in and wreck them a few weeks later? You do it.


And finally....... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

[The Joy]

Un bon petit Diable

Un bon petit Diable (T-H-L-K-D) Not there!

[EricBarbour]

Almost forgot the beam commutator tube--extremely rare. One of National Union Co's most insane ideas.

(In fact, there's no article about National Union either.)

[Peter Damian]

Anomalistic psychology - now a well established discipline (try Google). Nothing much in Wikipedia, certainly not an article.

[MBisanz]

Peter Symonds - You would think some student at Peter Symonds College would have created at least a stub about the person the school is named after.

oh, and of course we have a trivia section in the college article, unsourced as usual:

The current principal, Neil Hopkins is now the only principal not to have a building in the college named after him, and instead the landfill site in front of the Northbrook building which was demolished has been affectionately called Hopkins' Hump.

[CharlotteWebb]

Peter Symonds - You would think some student at Peter Symonds College would have created at least a stub about the person the school is named after.

I'm sure User:PeterSymonds can handle that.

[thekohser]

In Wikipedia's List of banks, there are no banks from the United States listed. Thirteen banks from Botswana listed, but none from the USA.

Makes a lot of sense.

[CharlotteWebb]

In Wikipedia's List of banks, there are no banks from the United States listed. Thirteen banks from Botswana listed, but none from the USA.

Ah, well we're just "countering systemic bias" obviously. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

No, the real answer, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&action=history

It was split off into a separate list of U.S. banks, which was denounced as list-cruft because it almost numbered over 9,000. Thus it was "merged" to [[Banking in the United States]] (without salvaging any part of the list).

Pretty stupid if you ask me.

[Malleus]

Lots of special-purpose vacuum tubes were made, mostly between WWII and 1960.
Most of them aren't on Wikipedia, except (at most) as passing mentions in related articles.
All of these were historically significant, many were used in early digital computers or radar.

Phasitron (in the 1950s, most of the FM broadcast transmitters in America used one.)

Zahl Tube (very important in early development of radar)

Trochotron (only mentioned in the Nixie tube article because I put it there long ago....)

Pixie tube (ditto)

Orbital-beam tube (mentioned in the Secondary Emission article, only because I put it there. Three of them were in the SCR-270 radar that gave early warning of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. I would call that "historically significant".)

Radechon (used as memory in the Rice R1 computer of 1959)

Graphecon

Scan converters (a variety of designs)

Alphechon (one of the world's rarest collectible tubes--used as memory in RCA's Spectra 70 computer system display terminals, all of which were junked in 1970-72.)

Sheet-beam tube

Square-law tube (extremely rare item, used only in tube analog computers)

There's an article about Robert von Lieben, but it barely mentions the amplifying tube he invented, at about the same time as deForest.

I'll probably think of others later.

Plus there were two monostable-multivibrator circuits often seen in early computers, that were tube-only: the sanatron and the phantastron. This guy is using a phantastron circuit for musical sound effects.

This is a pathetic list. Lots of errors and thousands of omissions.

Gives the lie to the apologists who claim that the declining number of active wikipedia editors is because there are no more articles to be written.

[A Horse With No Name]

Peter Symonds - You would think some student at Peter Symonds College would have created at least a stub about the person the school is named after.

I'm sure User:PeterSymonds can handle that.

Provided that he doesn't allow someone to get a hold of his password and play around with the mop again. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)

[Casliber]

Lots of special-purpose vacuum tubes were made, mostly between WWII and 1960.
Most of them aren't on Wikipedia, except (at most) as passing mentions in related articles.
All of these were historically significant, many were used in early digital computers or radar.

Phasitron (in the 1950s, most of the FM broadcast transmitters in America used one.)

Zahl Tube (very important in early development of radar)

Trochotron (only mentioned in the Nixie tube article because I put it there long ago....)

Pixie tube (ditto)

Orbital-beam tube (mentioned in the Secondary Emission article, only because I put it there. Three of them were in the SCR-270 radar that gave early warning of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. I would call that "historically significant".)

Radechon (used as memory in the Rice R1 computer of 1959)

Graphecon

Scan converters (a variety of designs)

Alphechon (one of the world's rarest collectible tubes--used as memory in RCA's Spectra 70 computer system display terminals, all of which were junked in 1970-72.)

Sheet-beam tube

Square-law tube (extremely rare item, used only in tube analog computers)

There's an article about Robert von Lieben, but it barely mentions the amplifying tube he invented, at about the same time as deForest.

I'll probably think of others later.

Plus there were two monostable-multivibrator circuits often seen in early computers, that were tube-only: the sanatron and the phantastron. This guy is using a phantastron circuit for musical sound effects.

This is a pathetic list. Lots of errors and thousands of omissions.

Gives the lie to the apologists who claim that the declining number of active wikipedia editors is because there are no more articles to be written.

Absolutely, you don't have to go far before finding a swathe of redlinks to blue up.
Cas

[thekohser]

I'd like to add "Dilettante Chocolates" to the mix.

127,000 Google hits

63 news stories

And a fascinating corporate history dating back to 1898, including a royal appointment to the Imperial Court of Emperor Franz Josef I, Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary.

Also, as a Seattle-based company now, you'd think there would have been plenty of tech-savvy Seattle WikiNerds who'd have been eager to big up a local enterprise.

[Casliber]

I'd like to add "Dilettante Chocolates" to the mix.

127,000 Google hits

63 news stories

And a fascinating corporate history dating back to 1898, including a royal appointment to the Imperial Court of Emperor Franz Josef I, Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary.

Also, as a Seattle-based company now, you'd think there would have been plenty of tech-savvy Seattle WikiNerds who'd have been eager to big up a local enterprise.

Gosh, never heard of them, but I am in Oz...well, more to the DYK queue one day...

[Peter Damian]

I was really surprised to find hardly anything about the Gros Horloge in Rouen. It's a well known tourist attraction, and I have an old illustration of it inherited from my father, still hanging in the hall.

There is an article in the French Wikipedia

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gros_Horloge

but nothing in the English version. And reminds me of something important about encylopedias. They should aim to be about the stuff that is far away from us, in location, in time, in culture. Why? Because the stuff nearby is easy to find. We get a reference work for the stuff that is hard to find. But Wikipedia represents mostly North American teenage culture.

[CharlotteWebb]

Peter Symonds - You would think some student at Peter Symonds College would have created at least a stub about the person the school is named after.

I'm sure User:PeterSymonds can handle that.

Provided that he doesn't allow someone to get a hold of his password and play around with the mop again. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)

Should I care whether the article is in fact ghost-written by Steve Crossin? Just get it done someway.

[Casliber]

I was really surprised to find hardly anything about the Gros Horloge in Rouen. It's a well known tourist attraction, and I have an old illustration of it inherited from my father, still hanging in the hall.

There is an article in the French Wikipedia

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gros_Horloge

but nothing in the English version. And reminds me of something important about encylopedias. They should aim to be about the stuff that is far away from us, in location, in time, in culture. Why? Because the stuff nearby is easy to find. We get a reference work for the stuff that is hard to find. But Wikipedia represents mostly North American teenage culture.

I loved Rouen - another article to-do. Thanks for the tip Peter (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

[dogbiscuit]

There is an article in the French Wikipedia

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gros_Horloge

but nothing in the English version.

It is at times like this that Google Translate really impresses me.

[sbrown]

Gustave Goublier, composer. Classical music tends to do badly because its too highbrow except for really famous composers. See the famous row about female opera composers.

http://www.appl-lachaise.net/appl/article....?id_article=671

[EricBarbour]

Absolutely, you don't have to go far before finding a swathe of redlinks to blue up.
Cas

And with that, I am now certain that you are a fool. A Wiki-fool.

"Blueing up" those items will require a lot of very specialized arcane knowledge.
Which you, as a nerd hunched over a PC in Australia, will have some difficulty obtaining.

Would you like to try? I can offer suggestions.......

Are you a member of the Tube Collector's Association?
Because if you're looking for references for such articles, you will NEED to
be a TCA member, or have other access to their magazine--the only publication
in the world to run features about certain of those tubes, since the 1950s.
(No, it's not available online.)

Not to mention other resources dealing with radio and computer history,
such as the AWA Journal and old textbooks and trade magazines.

Ever been to the Computer History Museum?
Their collection would be essential for reference material about computing tubes.

Can't do it all with Google. Don't even dream about looking online.

Yeah, there are two old tech articles about the Alphechon available online from republishers.
They don't say anything about how the Alphechon was actually used. One of the
TCA members actually owns an Alphechon--probably the only one in existence today.

(Poking Cas is just too easy. I feel as if I'm committing unsportsmanlike behaviour.)

[Malleus]

And reminds me of something important about encylopedias. They should aim to be about the stuff that is far away from us, in location, in time, in culture. Why? Because the stuff nearby is easy to find. We get a reference work for the stuff that is hard to find. But Wikipedia represents mostly North American teenage culture.

Some of us are doing our best.

[Casliber]

Absolutely, you don't have to go far before finding a swathe of redlinks to blue up.
Cas

And with that, I am now certain that you are a fool. A Wiki-fool.

"Blueing up" those items will require a lot of very specialized arcane knowledge.
Which you, as a nerd hunched over a PC in Australia, will have some difficulty obtaining.

Would you like to try? I can offer suggestions.......

Are you a member of the Tube Collector's Association?
Because if you're looking for references for such articles, you will NEED to
be a TCA member, or have other access to their magazine--the only publication
in the world to run features about certain of those tubes, since the 1950s.
(No, it's not available online.)

Not to mention other resources dealing with radio and computer history,
such as the AWA Journal and old textbooks and trade magazines.

Ever been to the Computer History Museum?
Their collection would be essential for reference material about computing tubes.

Can't do it all with Google. Don't even dream about looking online.

Yeah, there are two old tech articles about the Alphechon available online from republishers.
They don't say anything about how the Alphechon was actually used. One of the
TCA members actually owns an Alphechon--probably the only one in existence today.

(Poking Cas is just too easy. I feel as if I'm committing unsportsmanlike behaviour.)

I absolutely agree - one doesn't have to go far before one finds a subject for which information freely accessible online can be described as meagre at best. Just about every Featured Article and Good Article I have written has required some thumbing through...real-live paper books!!! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wtf.gif)

PS: Being a Tube COllector reminds me of 'get your valves' in the movie Brazil for some reason...

This post has been edited by Casliber:

[sbrown]

Are you a member of the Tube Collector's Association?
Because if you're looking for references for such articles, you will NEED to
be a TCA member, or have other access to their magazine--the only publication
in the world to run features about certain of those tubes, since the 1950s.
(No, it's not available online.)

Not to mention other resources dealing with radio and computer history,
such as the AWA Journal and old textbooks and trade magazines.

Ever been to the Computer History Museum?
Their collection would be essential for reference material about computing tubes.

Can't do it all with Google. Don't even dream about looking online.

Yes but if its not online then by wikilogic it fails WP:V. No doubt there are others here who have given references to published books and told thats no good other editors cant find the book.

[thekohser]

I'm surprised nobody has written yet about Brandywine Springs. The place has a fascinating, multi-century story, tracing from Native American gatherings and legends; to General George Washington preparing promptly-abandoned defense works against the oncoming Howe/Cornwallis assault; to a fashionable spa and hotel (designed by U.S. Capitol Building architect T.U. Walker) located on the site from 1827-1853 and visited by such notables as Henry Clay; followed by a thriving early-20th century amusement park.

I'd like to write the article for a wiki, but I think this one's going to Wikipedia Review, not Wikipedia.

[JohnA]

My nomination: There's still no article on Linda Mack.

[sbrown]

Further to my post elsewhere there is nothing on the 19th/20th century theologian John Skinner

http://www.bluethread.com/reviews/authors.html

although there are three other John Skinners with articles.

[Casliber]

Some broad subjects where material is meagre - dog breeds (but I guess dog owners are out doing other things...like walking their dogs...rather than editing wikipedia).

Similarly, alot of gardening and horticulture material is boards and blogs.
Cas

[Malleus]

Some broad subjects where material is meagre - dog breeds (but I guess dog owners are out doing other things...like walking their dogs...rather than editing wikipedia).

Similarly, alot of gardening and horticulture material is boards and blogs.
Cas

The truth is that the overwhelming majority of wikipedia's articles are complete crap, but what is reprehensible is that the few thousand decent ones have to be continually guarded, else they'll descend to the level of the rest.

This post has been edited by Malleus:

[thekohser]

Some broad subjects where material is meagre - dog breeds (but I guess dog owners are out doing other things...like walking their dogs...rather than editing wikipedia).

Similarly, alot of gardening and horticulture material is boards and blogs.
Cas

The truth is that the overwhelming majority of wikipedia's articles are complete crap, but what is reprehensible is that the few thousand decent ones have to be continually guarded, else they'll descend to the level of the rest.

That's by design, you know. It keeps "the community" feeling important, needed, and addicted.

[thekohser]

Just a thread to add those subjects where you fully expect there would have been a Wikipedia article about it, but there isn't.

Bob Welch songs:

* Sentimental Lady

* Hypnotized (the one made famous by Fleetwood Mac) (not this garbage)

Let's see how this goes over.

[thekohser]

I'm surprised nobody has written yet about Brandywine Springs. The place has a fascinating, multi-century story, tracing from Native American gatherings and legends; to General George Washington preparing promptly-abandoned defense works against the oncoming Howe/Cornwallis assault; to a fashionable spa and hotel (designed by U.S. Capitol Building architect T.U. Walker) located on the site from 1827-1853 and visited by such notables as Henry Clay; followed by a thriving early-20th century amusement park.

I'd like to write the article for a wiki, but I think this one's going to Wikipedia Review, not Wikipedia.

Let the work begin! (I believe that Cla68 is even going to help me out on this article.)

[Peter Damian]

I have just found a magnificient one. Propositional function has nothing in Wikipedia.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&sourc...&meta=&aq=f&oq=

There is a redirect to 'mathematical function', but that has nothing to speak of of the 'propositional' variety. So, here is a concept fundamental to the development of analytic philosophy and logic in the twentieth century, that every undergraduate philosophy and philosophy student will have to learn about, and Wikipedia has almost nothing about it, and no separate article at all.

Even better, I can now simply declare that the next Peter Damian sock is going to create a separate, well-sourced article on the propositional function (and perhaps email a few significant admins such as Mikaey of this intention). Result: the Wikipedia administration will be closely watching for the creation of such an article in order to block anyone who is trying to build a serious and comprehensive reference work by adding important new material.

The irony meter is now well into the red zone.

[Moulton]

Propositional function has nothing in Wikipedia.

The irony is that Wikipedia, itself, is a dysfunctional proposition.

The irony meter is now well into the red zone.

Ayup.

[Peter Damian]

Hawkesyard

After Gregory Kohs kindly proxied for a banned user by adding the article on Osmund Lewry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmund_Lewry, I did a little research on the unlinked place called 'Hawkesyard Priory' where Lewry taught in the 1960's and it turns out there is no article on Hawkesyard. There are plenty of articles where it could be linked from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...fulltext=Search and it is a beautiful place

http://www.nbsanity.me.uk/images/Calendar%...es/Image10.html
http://fiveprime.org/hivemind/Tags/hawkesyard

but there is nothing about the priory itself. Even the article on the village (Armitage, Rugeley County Staffordshire) where it is located does not mention it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armitage

There is an article about Armitage Park where it is located http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armitage_Park, but this does not mention its correct name: 'Hawkesyard Priory' http://two.archiseek.com/archives/1855. Nor is there an article about the building that formerly occupied the grounds, Hawkesyard Hall. There is no article about the architect, Edward Goldie, who was the son of George Goldie, although there is an article about his father http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Goldie_(architect) .

This problem is not isolated. The Wikipedia article on monastic houses in Staffordshire http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_monas...n_Staffordshire shows how many redlinks there are. People who say that Wikipedia is in its 'saturation phase' are only correct relative to the universe of possible articles about Britney Spears. Relative to the universe of old priories, medieval philosophers, English villages, and so on, Wikipedia is mostly empty.

[edit] There is an excellent list here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JohnArma...ork_in_progress

by John Armagh, who deserves a medal of some sort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JohnArmagh Interesting that, unless he has hidden them, Armagh has no barnstar of any sort on his page.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Angela Kennedy]

Yes, and Guido is spinning it as a giant WP conspiracy, when it in fact it really must be spun as a Canada vs. (UK and US) conspiracy, since the UK and US definitions don't recognize "myalgic encephalomyelitis." Worse still the "consensus document" from Canada about ME is symptom-driven: objective tests are not needed criteria. This is despite what you'll read on ME websites which claim that there are objective tests for ME. Even Canada recognizes none. So much for THAT consensus.

I take it that you have not actually read the document. The Canadian consensus definition of ME/CFS (i.e. not of ME or CFS separately!) includes a protocol that describes what research needs to be done. The old Fukuda and Holmes definitions for CFS (we now have Reeves, that is 10 times as many patients) also explicitly state that patients need to be thoroughly medically examined. Obviously, no CFS definition recognizes ME, just like no definition of cancer or of a bicycle does. ME definitions recognize ME. There are UK (Ramsay) and Canadian (Hyde) definitions of ME.

As for the giant conspiracy which covers up something that the WHO believed in, in 1969, well, science moves on.

It certainly does. Wikipedia otoh only moves backwards.

We're still waiting for the mechanism of "chronic fatigue."

The mechanism of chronic fatigue is well known and has been for quite some time, in part thanks to ME researchers like Behan.

Sorry, missed all this before.

The interesting thing here is that the WHO DOES recognised Myaligic Encephalomyelitis as a neurological disorder (since 1969). The term DOES have a history of use (including it's dismissal by two psychs who never saw any of the patients of the Royal Free epidemic). It is a term over which there is controversy. Whatever Milton's view of the WHO's recognition (trivialising) or anybody's view of the illness, it SHOULD be notable enough for a separate page detailing the term.

What actually happened was that JFW, very soon after the debacle on the Simon Wessely page leading to me being defamed then 'excommunicated' by the God-King himself , nominated a perfectly good article that Guido had composed for deletion, and various others chimed in.

If the general public look up Myalgic Encephalomyelitis, then they should be able to see where the term came from, especially as there is some confusion as to 'CFS's relationship to 'ME' with regard to WHO.

I don't know who 'Tekaphor' is (he edits the CFS and Wessely pages), but one thing he said struck with me, basically along the lines of, as soon as people try to sort out problems on the CFS page, they get metaphorical eyerolling and some lame-arsed comments about "'well everything is physical anyway".

Again, I don't think WP has the infrastructure to deal with sublety and complexity- so I'd rather CFS was a short stub (and ME), and other subjects, because the damage to real-world people by ideologically driven edit-warring is absurd, yet serious.

[Guido den Broeder]

Yes, WP being what it is, there is no hope that it will ever be able to deal with users that purposely spread misinformation, so a short stub would be way better.

JFW is employed by the NHS in England and therefore attempts to push that horrible NICE guideline.

Needless to say, that this giant conflict of interest has not been declared by this user...

[thekohser]

Hawkesyard

After Gregory Kohs kindly proxied for a banned user by adding the article on Osmund Lewry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmund_Lewry, I did a little research on the unlinked place called 'Hawkesyard Priory' where Lewry taught in the 1960's and it turns out there is no article on Hawkesyard. There are plenty of articles where it could be linked from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...fulltext=Search and it is a beautiful place

Here's what I don't understand, Peter. At this point, you really ought to have given up trying to assist Wikipedia, and you ought to start assisting yourself. My suggestion:

(1) Get yourself a Google AdSense account.
(2) Create the world's most comprehensive collective directory of abbeys and priories on Wikipedia Review, similar to what you've done with the Logic Museum.
(3) License it as "all rights reserved", so that Wikipedia can't thieve your work.
(4) Sit back and collect the AdSense revenue, or be more proactive and contact the local tourism boards or chambers of commerce of the towns near these institutions and sell them customized advertising space.
(5) Every 12 or 18 months or so, you may be getting a $100 check from Google. Take your wife out to a nice dinner, and laugh about how silly Wikipedia was for forcing you to have taken your intellectual contributions to another venue.

You've already thoroughly proven your point (and may continue to do so) on Wikipedia subjects that are not so wide-open and ripe for advertising support. Travel, tourism, history, beautiful buildings on beautiful grounds. Don't let this one fall into your basket of "I'll show Wikipedia a thing or two".

[CharlotteWebb]

(4) Sit back and collect the AdSense revenue, or be more proactive and contact the local tourism boards or chambers of commerce of the towns near these institutions and sell them customized advertising space.
(5) Every 12 or 18 months or so, you may be getting a $100 check from Google. Take your wife out to a nice dinner, and laugh about how silly Wikipedia was for forcing you to have taken your intellectual contributions to another venue.

Not quite that simple. You'd also need to convince some person or thing to "visit" the ads.

I understand that's part of the problem over at ED. The site is plastered with adware which nobody would click on—not with a stolen mouse—so they still need to beg for donations.

[Lar]

(4) Sit back and collect the AdSense revenue, or be more proactive and contact the local tourism boards or chambers of commerce of the towns near these institutions and sell them customized advertising space.
(5) Every 12 or 18 months or so, you may be getting a $100 check from Google. Take your wife out to a nice dinner, and laugh about how silly Wikipedia was for forcing you to have taken your intellectual contributions to another venue.

Not quite that simple. You'd also need to convince some person or thing to "visit" the ads.

I understand that's part of the problem over at ED. The site is plastered with adware which nobody would click on—not with a stolen mouse—so they still need to beg for donations.

I think that's where the "contact the local tourism boards or chambers of commerce" (and sell them ads) bit fits in... some ads are a bit safer than others. I'm more likely to click an ad that says "learn more about Hawksbury Priory by visiting the Rugely County Stafforshire chamber of commerce site" (while on a page about Hawksbury Priory) than I am to click an ad that says "learn more about coprophagia by visiting the 2girls1cup site" (while on a page about something unrelated), frankly. And that's ED's money problem in a nutshell. What reputable site would want to advertise there?

[Angela Kennedy]

Yes, WP being what it is, there is no hope that it will ever be able to deal with users that purposely spread misinformation, so a short stub would be way better.

JFW is employed by the NHS in England and therefore attempts to push that horrible NICE guideline.

Needless to say, that this giant conflict of interest has not been declared by this user...

To be honest Guido, I don't think being an NHS employee per se will necessarily guarantee support of any NICE Guidelines.

However, JFW has a very obvious ideologically- driven POV at the very least on illnesses like 'CFS' or 'ME' (though there are others), on controversial doctors, on uppity patients and their advocates etc. If one looks through his comments on talk pages and his edits over the years (or even relatively recently) it can clearly be seen. I have no idea whether he is a meatpuppet for 'vested interests' or not. However I feel confident that it can be demonstrated that he has an extremely problematic ideological standpoint on at least some subjects, and commits blatantly partisan behaviour on Wikipedia, and he doesn't get called on it. The likes of you or I Guido however, openly and honestly expressive of our Conflicts of Interest, have been hounded and libelled.

What is of particular concern for me is the way JFW uses his doctor status (actually a junior doctor who has been also reprimanded by the GMC after a patient died) to claim expertise and authority on Wikipedia (though others do that for him also), in order to wage POV wars etc. I think people like JFW represent the problems around claimed 'expertise' on Wikipedia, how easily an assumed air of authority will bamboozle people, how claims to expertise get subjected to games of trumps etc in the power struggle to win 'the game' of truth-claiming, and how such complex issues can never be addressed successfully on Wikipedia. I'm very rarely a person who says 'never'- and yet I cannot see WP ever being able to resolve these issues.

[Peter Damian]

Here's what I don't understand, Peter. At this point, you really ought to have given up trying to assist Wikipedia, and you ought to start assisting yourself.

Yes yes, meanwhile can someone help me complete the article on columba ryan. The completed article is on my talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pre...omplete_article, I was blocked by Deskana just as I was finishing it. Thanks.

[edit] Oh I see someone has already done this. Thanks

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Peter Damian]

Oh even better: Columnba Ryan is now up for deletion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columba_Ryan

because it was written by a 'banned user'. Patrick Ryan, son of Sir Andrew Ryan (himself an interesting character, British diplomat, spy, present at the early days of the House of Saud), brother of John Ryan whom everyone of my generation is familiar with from 'Captain Pugwash', and himself an influential teacher who was mentor to Geach and Anscombe, McDermott (translator of Aquinas). But not notable enough for Wikipedia and in any case the article was written by a 'banned user'.

How much more of a farce can this be?

[edit] Ironically, Triplestop is on some stupid 'article creation' project.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=314927344

Ah yes this explains it. 'Triplestop' has no brain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...top&namespace=0

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Peter Damian]

19:40, 19 September 2009 Lar (talk | contribs) blocked The Cement of the Universe (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite ‎ (Abusing multiple accounts or IPs: Plus I think Peter wants this account blocked anyway)

Oy no Lar I didn't want it blocked. There were some things I wanted to finish. Do you support this project or not?

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Lar]

19:40, 19 September 2009 Lar (talk | contribs) blocked The Cement of the Universe (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite ‎ (Abusing multiple accounts or IPs: Plus I think Peter wants this account blocked anyway)

Oy no Lar I didn't want it blocked. There were some things I wanted to finish. Do you support this project or not?

You have an unclear antecedent for "this project".

Seems a sound enough article though, at first glance. So I've taken responsibility for it to shield it from summary deletion as work of a banned user. Hope that's not what you wanted to have happen.

[Peter Damian]

unclear antecedent for "this project".

I understand. Yes, it is all being carefully documented

http://www.wikipediareview.com/Directory:The_Wik...#Other_accounts

And here you do show a particle of sense.

(cur) (prev) 19:50, 19 September 2009 Lar (talk | contribs) (3,106 bytes) (Null edit. At first glance this seems a reasonable article, sourced to reliable sources, about a person who's notable enough to get an obit in the London Times. Not a valid speedy) (undo)

Yes, the obit in the Times should have been a clue for 'TripleStop'. As also was the fact he taught some highly influential and important living philosophers. the problem is, Lar, that while you and I have our disagreements, you are like Thatcher one of the 'old guard' who have some judgment and are able to see when to follow the rules, and when to turn a blind eye for the good of the project (Wikipedia I mean).

This new lot are really just barbarians.


Thanks for saving the Ryan article anyway. You know I really care about that sort of thing.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Lar]

unclear antecedent for "this project".

I understand. Yes, it is all being carefully documented

http://www.wikipediareview.com/Directory:The_Wik...#Other_accounts

Oh. THAT project. I thought maybe you meant the work of countless doughty and dauntless Wikipedia volunteers there for a second. Silly me.

"Do you support this project or not?" - Obviously not.

And here you do show a particle of sense.

(cur) (prev) 19:50, 19 September 2009 Lar (talk | contribs) (3,106 bytes) (Null edit. At first glance this seems a reasonable article, sourced to reliable sources, about a person who's notable enough to get an obit in the London Times. Not a valid speedy) (undo)

Yes, the obit in the Times should have been a clue for 'TripleStop'. As also was the fact he taught some highly influential and important living philosophers.

Sorry about that.

[Peter Damian]

Oh. THAT project. I thought maybe you meant the work of countless doughty and dauntless Wikipedia volunteers there for a second. Silly me.

Who are these? Where are the articles? This thread is about all the articles that are missing in Wikipedia.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Lar]

Thanks for saving the Ryan article anyway. You know I really care about that sort of thing.

That's the part I don't get. If you've been as hard done by as you think, why give the (wikipedia) project your efforts? What satisfaction do you derive? I'd have found a new hobby by now, were I you.

A good part of what keeps me around is that it's fun to work on articles like this one: Rika's Landing Roadhouse or this one: Alaska Road Commission ... certainly not 'important' in the grand scheme of things but fun to write, and useful. I think they are anyway...

But if SV et al had succeeded in their smear campaign last year I would have downed tools and found a new hobby. Maybe I shouldn't admit that, but there it is.

Oh. THAT project. I thought maybe you meant the work of countless doughty and dauntless Wikipedia volunteers there for a second. Silly me.

Who are these? Where are the articles? This thread is about all the articles that are missing in Wikipedia.

The editors who have written the 3M plus articles that WP does have.

[Peter Damian]

Thanks for saving the Ryan article anyway. You know I really care about that sort of thing.

That's the part I don't get. If you've been as hard done by as you think, why give the (wikipedia) project your efforts? What satisfaction do you derive? I'd have found a new hobby by now, were I you.

I'm worried about pollution.

[Lar]

Thanks for saving the Ryan article anyway. You know I really care about that sort of thing.

That's the part I don't get. If you've been as hard done by as you think, why give the (wikipedia) project your efforts? What satisfaction do you derive? I'd have found a new hobby by now, were I you.

I'm worried about pollution.

Lost me there.

[Peter Damian]

I'm worried about pollution.

Lost me there.

Neurolinguistic programming, scientology, junk psychology/philosophy, 'pederasty', Objectivism.

The two articles you showed me were very nice and also important in that (like Columba Ryan) they take us away from the present and teach teenagers something about the past. Not remotely controversial. It's the pollution that is the problem.

I don't see why we seem to have ended up on different sides (if that is the case - perhaps not).

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Lar]

I'm worried about pollution.

Lost me there.

Neurolinguistic programming, scientology, junk psychology/philosophy, 'pederasty', Objectivism.

The two articles you showed me were very nice and also important in that (like Columba Ryan) they take us away from the present and teach teenagers something about the past. Not remotely controversial. It's the pollution that is the problem.

I don't see why we seem to have ended up on different sides (if that is the case - perhaps not).

I expect our ends are more congruent than you might expect. Our means just differ.

[Peter Damian]

I expect our ends are more congruent than you might expect. Our means just differ.

Then why aren't you doing something about the likes of Triplestop? Here he is, replacing the tag on the article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=314965697

He had a change of heart later, but the very fact there are people like that running the project is very disturbing.

Policy should change so that article quality takes priority over everything else. These 'experiments' of mine prove beyond all doubt that this is not the case.

Actually to your credit I see you are. By why hasn't this person been blocked or banned? He or she is no use to the project.

Regarding this G5 tagging. It's already been explained to you that the article is ineligible for G5 tagging. Your removal was prudent, but your edit summary is fallacious. No further edits by me or anyone else are required to make it ineligible for G5, all that is required is that some other editor takes responsibility. Which I have done, see the note at the talk page. That tagging of yours was a disruptive edit, and you are strongly advised not to do it again. Also, next time you template a regular, please have the courtesy to sign your work instead of expecting someone else to clean up after you. ++Lar: t/c 05:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

This is the hard part of G5. PD knows this. So he's going to sock and/or proxy to get "good" articles into wikipedia in order to show us all how wrong we were about banning him for being disputatious and unpleasant. Burn. with. fire. Protonk (talk) 21:55, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree w/ NW. There is really no option here other than avoiding playing his games. Part of the reason he is banned is because he insisted on treating other people like this, placing them in seemingly implacable binds in order to fulfill his views about wikipedia. It's petty and fanatical and we are better off just going without it. If that means wikipedia has 1 less article on 13th century theologians so be it. Protonk (talk) 22:43, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Gasp.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[thekohser]

Not quite that simple. You'd also need to convince some person or thing to "visit" the ads.

I understand that's part of the problem over at ED. The site is plastered with adware which nobody would click on—not with a stolen mouse—so they still need to beg for donations.

I will bet a dollar to a dime that Wikipedia Review is getting more fruitful AdSense returns per page view than ED.

[thekohser]

I'm surprised nobody has written yet about Brandywine Springs. The place has a fascinating, multi-century story, tracing from Native American gatherings and legends; to General George Washington preparing promptly-abandoned defense works against the oncoming Howe/Cornwallis assault; to a fashionable spa and hotel (designed by U.S. Capitol Building architect T.U. Walker) located on the site from 1827-1853 and visited by such notables as Henry Clay; followed by a thriving early-20th century amusement park.

I'd like to write the article for a wiki, but I think this one's going to Wikipedia Review, not Wikipedia.

Let the work begin! (I believe that Cla68 is even going to help me out on this article.)

And, once again, I'm able to prove a bit of a point. If people are tired of Wikipedia's constant battlefield and cleaning up after people who can't write, they might visit a site like Wikipedia Review and establish a content page that has the ability to outrank an identically-named page on Wikipedia.

Just Cla68 and I have worked on the Wikipedia Review page, while Wkharrisjr, Thomas.macmillan, SmackBot, Phantomsteve, Briantist, Mr. Matté, The Anomebot2, Ironholds, and I have worked on the similar Wikipedia page. Which one is better? Which one is worse? Which one represents the "wisdom of crowds"?

This post has been edited by thekohser:

[A Horse With No Name]

Just Cla68 and I have worked on the Wikipedia Review page, while Wkharrisjr, Thomas.macmillan, SmackBot, Phantomsteve, Briantist, Mr. Matté, The Anomebot2, Ironholds, and I have worked on the similar Wikipedia page. Which one is better? Which one is worse? Which one represents the "wisdom of crowds"?

One reason (among many) that I cannot take WP seriously is that 98% of the editors sound like characters on “Batman.” I mean, truly, how can one keep a straight face knowing that the likes of SmackBot, Phantomsteve, Mr. Matté, The Anomebot2 and Ironholds are running amok? Just from the sound of their monikers, are these guys out to improve the quality of online scholarship, or are they in cahoots with Catwoman to steal the jewelry collection from the Gotham Museum? Holy inane pseudonym! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif)

[Appleby]

Holy inane pseudonym!

Sorry, what were all your various pseudonyms again?

This post has been edited by Appleby:

[A Horse With No Name]

Holy inane pseudonym!

Sorry, what were all your various pseudonyms again?

You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? Then who the hell else are you talking...

Sorry, my DeNiro needs more work. I'll get back to you later on that. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/evilgrin.gif)

[thekohser]

Holy inane pseudonym!

Sorry, what were all your various pseudonyms again?

Perhaps the distinction to make is that Horsey doesn't expect (or even prefer) to be taken seriously, the way Wikipedia expects (or even demands) to be taken seriously.

[Appleby]

Perhaps the distinction to make is that Horsey doesn't expect (or even prefer) to be taken seriously, the way Wikipedia expects (or even demands) to be taken seriously.

We're not talking about his Horse persona here but his many WP ones where I assume (he'll correct me if I'm wrong) he did wish to be taken seriously.

[A Horse With No Name]

Perhaps the distinction to make is that Horsey doesn't expect (or even prefer) to be taken seriously, the way Wikipedia expects (or even demands) to be taken seriously.

We're not talking about his Horse persona here but his many WP ones where I assume (he'll correct me if I'm wrong) he did wish to be taken seriously.

If I had the proverbial three wishes, none of them would ever be squandered on the notion of being taken seriously. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

[CharlotteWebb]

I will bet a dollar to a dime that Wikipedia Review is getting more fruitful AdSense returns per page view than ED.

I've always wondered, how does one go about getting humans to click on these?

[everyking]

It seems to me the purpose of bans is to prevent people to harming the encyclopedia. Since Peter is trying to help the encyclopedia by creating valuable new articles, and these other people are trying to keep him from doing so, wouldn't it make more sense to ban them instead? Anybody who thinks petty politics is more important than "one more article on a 13th century theologian" has lost the plot completely and has no place on the project.

This post has been edited by everyking:

[Shalom]

It seems to me the purpose of bans is to prevent people to harming the encyclopedia. Since Peter is trying to help the encyclopedia by creating valuable new articles, and these other people are trying to keep him from doing so, wouldn't it make more sense to ban them instead? Anybody who thinks petty politics is more important than "one more article on a 13th century theologian" has lost the plot completely and has no place on the project.

Why don't you tell that to "Anonymous editor"? He thinks a bit of disruption overrides the value of 350+ articles and 10,000+ mainspace edits, and he says Wikipedia would be better off if I never discovered it and never edited it. Why don't you criticize him instead of criticizing me?

[Angela Kennedy]

It seems to me the purpose of bans is to prevent people to harming the encyclopedia.

I'm sorry but that's an untenable claim. Bans are given to people for all sorts of reasons - even ostensible 'prevent harm' reasons often have a hidden agenda, related to people for whom 'the project' is NOT their priority, but their own positions in the 'community' itself, their own POV warring etc.

I'm of the understanding that there are many people here on WR who were 'banned' when 'harming the project' was not their intent, and for which the 'banning' itself has served to bring Wikipedia into disrepute (that is, WP's reputation has been placed at risk by the banning of someone). I'm one of them, and I got banned by Jimbo himself, at the behest of Guy Chapman and some others. Logical assessment of the 'harm' to the 'project' was not part of their thought processes on that occasion, and that appears a common problem over there.

For every person who has been 'banned' unfairly, even among those of us who couldn't give a fig about being banned (like myself), the processes of Wikipedia come under scrutiny, and are found to be suspect by many: a common theme in Wikipedia Review discussions, for example.

[Appleby]

Anybody who thinks petty politics is more important than "one more article on a 13th century theologian" has lost the plot completely and has no place on the project.

It's not petty politics. It's ensuring thast there is a congenial environment for people to edit in. I don't think he should have been banned indef but I see the logic in having such bans sometimes.

[thekohser]

Anybody who thinks petty politics is more important than "one more article on a 13th century theologian" has lost the plot completely and has no place on the project.

It's not petty politics. It's ensuring thast there is a congenial environment for people to edit in. I don't think he should have been banned indef but I see the logic in having such bans sometimes.

Congenial environment -

(Real world) a place where my divergent but rational views will be cordially discussed and tolerated.

(Wikipedia world) a publishing venue where nobody will ever criticize my lying, my cheating, my hypocrisy, or my graft.

[everyking]

It's not petty politics. It's ensuring thast there is a congenial environment for people to edit in. I don't think he should have been banned indef but I see the logic in having such bans sometimes.

You can't be serious. He was banned because he got into an argument with a really powerful editor. If he had picked some powerless person like me to argue with, he'd never have gotten into any trouble.

[Milton Roe]

It's not petty politics. It's ensuring thast there is a congenial environment for people to edit in. I don't think he should have been banned indef but I see the logic in having such bans sometimes.

You can't be serious. He was banned because he got into an argument with a really powerful editor. If he had picked some powerless person like me to argue with, he'd never have gotten into any trouble.

And that's WHY we don't give you any power, Everyking. Bruhahahah.

[Guido den Broeder]

It seems to me the purpose of bans is to prevent people to harming the encyclopedia.

How naive. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

A typical purpose of bans is to protect the banning party's biased views. Once you understand that, you can learn how to read Wikipedia.

And that's WHY we don't give you any power, Everyking. Bruhahahah.

I'd give it to him. There'll be more banned users to fill our ranks, yeah! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)