Jump to content

User talk:Zaorish

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

getting rid of microarticles on fictional topics


I think what you're looking for here is the {{merge}}, {{mergefrom}}, {{mergeto}} templates; otherwise if it's complete rubbish, you may want to go with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. -- nae'blis (talk) 21:43, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]



Taking one small quote out of context from an entire work without speaking about the larger work hardly constitutes the work we're trying to do on Wikipedia. I think it's obvious you're trying to subvert respect for Kass instead of represent his views fairly, otherwise you would have tried to summarize the overall flow of "The Hungry Soul."

Yes, I'm an expert on Kass. I've written published reviews of his work and a master's thesis on him. I also know him personally.

Bug off.

--Noesis 02:15, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noesis: You've convinced me that that was a quote unimportant to Kass' worldview.

I have no intention to subvert respect for Kass. I simply want to describe the full range of his moral ideas. I have a lot of respect for his investigation of the links between modesty, sexuality, and love.

However, this fact, and the fact that you wrote a master's thesis on Kass, does not mean you can delete whatever you want without discussing it first. --Zaorish 02:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the fact that I've published peer-reviewed journal reviews of his work holds some weight. But more importantly, I think we need to look at the larger context of Kass's overall work, which shows a particular philosophic, and not ideological, bent. Representing him as attacking birth control or dismissing eating in public is not respectful of his work or his overall philosophic disposition. I think the transcipts from the Council, as well as his work in Toward a More Natural Science and The Wisdom of Repugnance makes that clear. Wouldn't you agree? --Noesis 03:06, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have not read those publications. But it sounds like you are very familiar with Kass any may be, for all I know, the single best wikipedian to describe him.

I only know Kass because I came across his page at AEI while considering appluing for an undergraduate internship there. As a Wikipedian, I was adding only what I knew, in the hopes that those who know more can clarify, add, and delete some parts of the original article, provided they do it in a civil way.

You seem like a great authority on Kass. Please, propose and/or execute these changes to his page, and we can discuss if anyone objects to them, and the validity of those possible objections, on the Discussion page.

I really appreciate you explaining your position, and I feel Wikipedia works best when people calmly share knowledge/ideas, look at them rationally, and then bow to the better-informed edit. --Zaorish 03:15, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Why don't you put back the quote from End of Courtship, but without the commentary arguing that he "attacks" birth control? Then maybe together we can add commentary on it, pointing out that it could be construed as being critical of birth control?

Zaorish, I apologize to you for being uncivil, sincerely. Please feel free to add what you would like to the Kass page, and I'll simply edit wording instead of deleting. I'm glad to see another fan of John Stuart Mill on Wiki. What do you think of Peter Singer's preference-utilitarianism? --Noesis 03:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

--Noesis 03:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Land


I noticed that you are acquainted and also an admirer of the music by Michael Land. I would be grateful if you could somehow expand with appropriate wording, the music section of The Dig article? Pictureuploader 02:16, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]



My knowledge of mental health isn't extensive, so my answer is limited to what I found through Google and my textbooks. I can't find any reputable write-up on the subject, but I suppose androphobia exists nevertheless. (Anything that you can tack on -phobia to probably exists in some form or another.) I'd agree that it's probably a subset of anxiety disorder, probably a specific phobia, but can't find anything online to back that up. --David Iberri (talk) 15:45, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. You might consider asking the reference desk for help on this one. --David Iberri (talk) 15:46, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Esperanza!


Welcome, Zaorish, to Esperanza, the Wikipedia member association! As you might know, all the Esperanzians share one important goal: the success of this encyclopedia. Within that, we then attempt to strengthen the community bonds, and be the "approachable" side of the project. All of our ideals are held in the Charter, the governing document of the association.

Now that you are a member you should read the guide to what to do now or you may be interested in some of our programs. A quite important program is the StressUnit, which seeks to support editors who have encountered any stress from their Wikipedia events, and are seeking to leave the project. So far, Esperanza can be credited with the support and retention of several users. We have a calendar of special events, member birthdays, and other holidays that you can add to and follow.

In addition to these projects, several more missions of Esperanza are in development, and are currently being created at Esperanza/Possibles.

I encourage you to take an active voice in the running of Esperanza. We have a small government system, headed by our Administrator general, Celestianpower, and guided by the Advisory Committee comprised of KnowledgeOfSelf, JoanneB, FireFox and Titoxd. The next set of elections will be in February, and I would be glad to see you vote, or even consider running for a position.

If you have any other questions, concerns, comments, or general ideas, Esperanzian or otherwise, know that you can always contact me via email or talk page. Alternatively, you could communicate with fellow users via our IRC channel, #wikipedia-esperanza (which is also good for a fun chat or two :). I thank you for joining Esperanza, and look forward to working with you in making Wikipedia a better place to be!

Thanks! - Srikeit(talk ¦ ) 17:00, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to welcome you. - File:Ottawa flag.png nathanrdotcom (TCW) 23:43, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I too may welcome you; more is always better. Welcome to Esperanza, by the way! :D -M o P 06:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We usually work in teams of 3-4; this way we don't overwhelm anyone or give you clicking-finger injuries. -M o P 06:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tove Jansson


I forgot all about that, sorry. It's citable that she had a female lifelong companion, [1], [2], [3], [4], that they were girlfriends, [5], [6] and the British Film Institute describe her as a lesbian in this pdf press release [7]. I think there's enough sources there to support it. I would add it appears it was something of a secret, albeit perhaps an open one, in Finalnd: [8], but I can't cite a better source for that as yet. Steve block talk 10:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Review request for Black Lagoon on WP:A&M


You'd probably be better off with Wikipedia:Peer review if you want useful feedback, it's not just a featured-article preschool.

I'll make some edits now: mag name is Sunday GX - label tanks are republished under often adds 'Comics', Madhouse are just Madhouse, serialisation start date seems wrong glancing at the (admittedly poor) ja.wikip article, using an anime series as a primary style comparison for a manga is nonsense...

Also, you seem to have fallen foul of the bad tendancy of linking random nouns in prose that anime articles suffer from, this isn't really useful, nor is size of the characters (fictional world) section compared to anything about the manga (real world) itself. Even if you can't manage a paragraph on the style of the manga, a page demonstrating it, uploaded under fair use terms, would go a long way to helping the article. --zippedmartin 23:39, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments on the black lagoon article. I appreciate getting some feedback on Wikipedia that's reasonable.
These seem like good suggestions, and I will look over the article and make changes based on them:
  • On peer review: It was really an informal request. I put it on the Animanga wikiproject page...because I figured there'd be a lot of anime/manga nuts there. I'll be sure to use Wikipedia:Peer Review in the future.
  • On the random noun linking:
You're right...linking things like 'face' and 'burn' is excessive. I'll change those. ^_^; But I feel that it will be interesting for readers to look into articles such as FARC or Meido, as insights into the characters.
  • On the size of the character section:
I really feel that, especially with this manga, the characters are more relevant than the episodic plot. Also, I found it difficult to make generalizations about the manga in general, rather than simply describing the characters (I've only read the first volume). So, at least, we can leave "expanding the General section" for later, and eliminate unimportant character information as we (you?) see fit.
  • Thanks for the tip, I'll try and post a scanned page...I'll see what 'fair use' is all about, first.
Thanks again for your help!
--Zaorish 02:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments on linking and character section were just warnings - obviously there are lots of things that are useful to link, and deleting good content just because an article is currently unbalanced is silly, wikipedia isn't about concrete 'finished state'. However that kind of pointer is the kind of thing you can get more usefully from peer review outside anime/manga people, as current articles tend to be lower standard than other areas. It's just easy to write a lot of plot summary & character description, but people tend to forget there's more to say about fiction/art than just its content.
On fair use, sorry, should have given you the info, it's a bit of a sketchy thing at the best of times, and wikip keeps moving the goalposts too. Basically, as in Image:Manga Example.png - with a {{Comicscene}} or {{Comicpanel}} as appropriate, and info on source, copyright, and why the image needs to be in article x (needed to show style, no free alternative, etc). A warning though, probably best not to use an image that scanlators have modified, though their changes can't carry a derivative copyright as it's without permission or licence, it's probably better to avoid any potential issues. (Yes, this is all a lot of pain for one picture...)
Anyway, hope I've been helpful rather than preachy, personally I find it incredibly hard just to write a paragraph on any given topic. --zippedmartin 14:14, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Me too...at least, one that won't get reverted instantly. I find that, in the interest of being encyclopedic, I often make generalizations about things (For example when I said that Black Lagoon bears many similarities to Cowboy Bebop), to provide the reader with a perspective on the comic they wouldn't necessarily get from just, well, reading it. After working on Wikipedia for a while, and getting such edits reverted, I began to get the impression that saying things like that is "original research" and I mostly avoid it. Is that what you meant by "there's more to say about fiction/art than just its content" ?--Zaorish 17:08, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Take queries over reverts of anything you add to the talk page of that article, you can generally either get a better explanation than given in the edit summary, or often a compromise sentence addition. That said, people wield the 'original research' stick too freely, the general way to counter it is cite a reliable source, though this can be trixy with manga/anime. Style crosslinks are a *good thing* in manga articles, I just question the usefulness of using an anime series as a primary comparison. Surely there are manga that have similar aesthetic, drawing and layout? I guess I'll have to grab it and see. :) --zippedmartin 22:46, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]



The quotes are from The Wind Up Bird Chronicle, by Haruki Murakami. Hope this helps! Páll (Die pienk olifant) 08:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old Skool Esperanzial note


Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Celestianpower háblame 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wall Street Journal page


Great job on those edits. You did a lot to dispel the "classical libertarian" obfuscation that some editors were trying to perpetuate. Eleemosynary 06:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was clearing out Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Pennsylvania. I added this template to your page. Feel free to remove it, and thanks for understanding. --evrik 04:47, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


You are invited to participate in WikiProject Philadelphia, a project dedicated to developing and improving articles about Philadelphia. We are currently discussing prospects for the project. Your input would be greatly appreciated!
--evrik 18:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Philly meetup


Hi! There will be a Wikipedia Meetup in Philadelphia on 4 November. If you're interested in coming, RSVP by editing Wikipedia:Meetup/Philadelphia 2 to reflect the likelihood of your being able to attend. If you have any questions, feel free to ask CComMack's. Hopefully, we'll all see you (and each other) on the 4th! --evrik 18:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]



This article was speedily deleted because it did not assert the subject's notability, and had no sources. If you can cure these problems, feel free to repost. Thanks, NawlinWiki 17:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Black_lagoon_levy.jpg


Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Black_lagoon_levy.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 05:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs


Hello Zaorish! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 859 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Lisa Frank - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:50, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lisa Frank for deletion


A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lisa Frank is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa Frank until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) T/S 05:13, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lisa Frank for deletion


A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lisa Frank is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa Frank (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 19:54, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]