User talk:Sofeil
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Sorry, I no longer edit actively. If you feel like something needs my attention feel free to e-mail me and I should repond within 12 hours. Thank you. Sofeil 07:58, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Welcome
|
[edit] EYB
Your edit: Why remove 25+ years of distinguished academic career from the lead? And what does it mean to provide a footnote for a section header? (New one to me, and I've been editing here for three years.) - Jmabel | Talk 05:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry I think my edits have been misunderstood.
- I removed that sentence because it doesn't seem significant enough to be put in the lead paragraph. So if she had taught at 30 different colleges you'd include all of those as well? All in the lead? If you wanted to emphasize that she's been teaching for 25+ years, then you could have said exactly that. Adding that she has previously taught at these colleges looked like information overload; too much biographical information in the lead. It's already covered in the "life" section. In any case I don't see what the big deal is. If you want to restore that sentence, go ahead. I don't care that much. It was just my judgment that the lead look better with that sentence removed.
- As for my referencing, obviously the use of footnotes is preferred. But I didn't feel like adding the same footnote to every single paragraph in the "life" section, so I cited the whole section. It actually looks better when you're reading the article. It only looks ugly when you're editing the section, but again everything looks ugly when you're editing the section (tables, citations, etc.). So I think the footnote is fine.
- Sofeil 08:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- The problem with citing that way is that there is no obvious relation to what material is cited for. The citation will continue to purport to cite for the whole section no matter how it changes, and the way our "diff" tools work (paragraph by paragraph) there will be nothing to call it to anyone's attention if someone adds material (or even new paragraphs) to the section that aren't borne out by that source.
Well I don't know, when I came across this article it had no citations. Some of the information in the "Life" section seemed potentially libelous, so I started checking this link for clues. A cursory look showed that many of the statements in that section come from this link. So I cited the link to help readers know where most of the information is coming from. No I did not intend for the edit to be perfect; it's just a minor improvement.
Hmm...it looks like you were the one who created this article in the first place?[1] It also looks like everything in that section was added by you???? So maybe you should be asking yourself whether the material in that section come from that source? What a waste of time! Sofeil 09:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia only recently started requiring inline citations. But it's only useful to add them after verifying them. - Jmabel | Talk 01:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Taboo
Sofeil, a taboo is a forbidden thing or action. But it can mean an idea or belief considered dangerous or unacceptable to a culture/society's standards. In America, to be racist or a socialist (to oppose the US' capitalist method based on the puritanical work ethic) had some mystical power to make others uncomfortable or deeply offended by the idea. And in Europe, any publically expressed semi-fascist or neo-nazi belief is mostly verboten (the obvious history of Nazism and/or communism has done to European countries) and will get censored or carries penalties (various depends on the country's laws and customs). The ideologies of extreme socialism, authoritarianism and tyranny carries an "evil" and repugnant quality to those in democratic countries and the post-civil rights American morality to oppose prejudice as a "taboo" or something "wrong". Not well sourced, but the entries is from an observer of socio-political beliefs on what the majority of Americans and Europeans have. No doubt the truth of these edits, but must adhere to the strict rules we have on Wikipedia. Sorry it was taken down while the entries held what I call "90% accuracy"...and prejudice or discrimination has become taboo. 63.3.14.2 11:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Taboo is a very "primitive" concept. Taboo is usually a prohibition again certain actions, peoples, or things, not ideas. So it has very little relation to cencorship. Taboo subjects are usually seen as obscene, and their history can be traced back to certain (now-uncoscious) superstitions. None of this is true of censorship. The closest taboos come to censorship is when we're dealing with taboos on certain names or terms (such as vulgar language). But then again labelling these as "censorship" is not entirely accurate. Censorship is a modern idea. It is enforced by goverments, and it prohibits the expression of certain ideas, not names and terms. Sofeil 02:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Two more things:
- How's semantics related to taboo????
- Please review WP:NOR. Most of the materials you've added are original research or personal opinions. If you're really serious about this you should try to look up some sources.
Sofeil 02:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sofeil, in professional business or in religious practice, some people use semantics (avoidance speech replaced by euphemisms and advanced words to describe a whole other thing, but are code words for what they mean) to cover up what they feel are taboo or forbidden for obvious reasons and for purposes to keep the status quo at work. In the office sensitivity training class, which words can you use without shocking or annoying people's inner feelings, but to get an idea across to people's minds on what you said to get the idea across without incitement? In sunday school, your teacher won't tell a child some subject not easily handled in a young age in order to teach the student the "proper" religious or moral values, like students get in trouble for asking a certain question that the religion wouldn't express or get into, especially for children or the presence of church or educational authority. And candidates running for political office can't be straight out to discuss certain ideas, principles and acts strong enough to rattle the establishment (a taboo idea can do just that!) Have you heard a presidential candidate keep a promise or change the wording of what he/she wants to do when they're elected in office? Ah touche! Societies make up rules on what's acceptable discord or what's not brought up by words? This is in the related field of taboos, subjects or things of ideas that aren't freely expressed, because it could tear down our foundation's walls.63.3.14.2 07:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Well I certainly appreciate your interest in this topic. The see also section is for articles that discuss the same topic. If you at the list, most of the articles listed discuss taboo. That's the main criterion for adding an article to that list. Semantics doesn't cut it. But another article, avoidance speech, is included because it's on the same subject. If you're interested in this subject, you can start contributing to the avoidance speech article. Sofeil 08:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
<<Take a look in the South Park and Drawn Together articles' described the animated series' subject matter are defined taboo to many, but not to all people, but are comedies aimed for mature audiences who are able to view these subjects in jest. >>
- Yes, but be wary of original research. Sofeil 08:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Lost List of People Named Thomas
You asked on my talk page about a list of people named Thomas, and referred to a page that I edited a few years ago. I cannot find the list anymore either. The best I can suggest is that you try searching beginning with this page:
people by the name Thomas
or one of its parent pages, which can be found descending from
List of people by name
My best current guess is that the list has fallen to the Wikipedia current policy to organize lists through use of category markers at the bottom of the referenced page, instead of creating pages full of links, which might become broken. If that is what happened, then the person who wiped out the first name list neglected to insert category links in every listed page.
The new system has a glaring defect, since there are several different spellings of that name: Thomas, Tomas, Thaumas, Tom, and Tamhais, to list a few. These all ought to be listed together but aren't any more. Similar or worse problems will arise with many other common names which are different in different languages (e.g. John in English, Jean in French, Sean in Irish, Jon or Ion in Scandanavian, etc.). Tom Lougheed 07:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Franz Kafka
I certainly wasn't suggesting that the book doesn't exist. The question is whether it is a reliable source under WP:RS; if it is, then of course you are entitled to cite it, and nobody should delete your citation though of course they may quote contradictory reliable sources. I'm not taking sides here, just trying to broker a peaceful solution consistent with Wikipedia principles.--Runcorn 11:12, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
- I've replied on Talk:Franz Kafka. One of the problems on Wikipedia is that people imagine that it is a forum for original research, and it isn't. We just quote what good sources say.
