This is an archive of past discussions with User:Netherzone. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello @Valfontis: thank you for your message. The reason I made the Breitenbush Hot Springs (thermal mineral springs) article is because the Breitenbush Hot Springs is about the commercial establishment: a retreat and conference center, and to my mind is very promotional and reads like an advertisement for the center. It is lacking in citations. In that article, the section on the springs is about the opportunity for paying guests to soak in their hot tubs, not on the actual geological phenomenon itself. The article I created is about the latter; the geothermal hot springs system, made up of over thirty separate springs, and covers a large geographic area. I used the info from NOAA not GNIS, if I made a mistake, let me know. Netherzone (talk) 14:56, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
I see what you mean. I think the current Breitenbush Hot Springs article should be moved to Breitenbush Hot Springs Retreat & Conference Center, and then your article could be moved to Breitenbush Hot Springs. Some folks might fail to make the distinction between the two, which is why I suggested a merge. There is also an article for Breitenbush, Oregon, which I felt should be distinct from the hot springs/resort business. (which lost some structures in the 2020 Oregon wildfires, BTW) I'm not super invested in merging but I do think "thermal mineral springs" is a really long qualifier so I would consider doing the page moves. The three articles taken together might overlap quite a bit so some clean up may be necessary. When I get a moment I'll run it by WikiProject Oregon. Valfontis (talk) 00:57, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
@Valfontis: it's a good idea to move the current BHS article to a new page just for the company/cooperative entity BHS retreat & conference center. And either move the BHS(tms) article to BHS or let it stand, I'm fine either way. Netherzone (talk) 14:57, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, thank you for your kind note. I'm sending you best wishes for a nice holiday season, and that you and yours are all healthy and happy. I hope that 2021 turns out to be a wonderful year. Thank you for everything you do here. Cheers, Netherzone (talk) 00:08, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
I came here to ask if you had noticed that the Wikipedia Christmas greetings seem to have disappeared this year? It's nice to see @Gerda Arendt: keeping the faith above! Happy holidays. Possibly (talk) 23:58, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Possibly, hello and happy holidays to you too. Hope all is well and that you and yours are healthy, happy and warm. I hadn't noticed the lack of Christmas greetings, but it has been such a strange year in general, it does not surprise me. I'm sort of holding my breath until the inauguration on January 21, then I will celebrate. Here's wishing the world has a better year in 2021! Cheers, Netherzone (talk) 00:06, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Happy Holidays
Everything is Going to be Alright,Martin Creed, 2015.
Thank you for all your edits and contributions this year. I wish you a happy holiday and good health! Possibly (talk)
"... in the end. If it isn't alright it wasn't yet the end." - quoted and translated from a film. Thank you, Netherzone. About cards: I don't send them, because then my contribs show who are best friends, so who are not. My (monthly) cards go to project members as thanks for project work the last month. My "card" (all year) to pick up, and ever changing, is here for the one that ends and here for the one to come, - sorry. the calendar is not new yet, working on it. Keep it watched for updates I consider worth sharing --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:02, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Netherzone, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and healthy New Year, Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia, –Davey2010Talk18:55, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
On 30 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Black-on-black ware, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that black-on-black ware(example pictured) has been created by generations of Puebloan Native American ceramic artists in Northern New Mexico? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Black-on-black ware. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Black-on-black ware), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Maile66 Thank you for alerting me. It's exciting to see it on the main page! Hope you have a happy new year and that 2021 is not a repeat of 2020. With good cheer, Netherzone (talk) 01:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Possibly, thanks! I learned a lot by doing the article, esp. since I don't really know very much about ceramics. I've always liked the way black-on-black looked so I gave it a shot. Now I'm obsessed and ordered a bunch of books and just created another new article on Pueblo pottery. Check it out if you find a moment. Thank you for the link to Barro negro pottery in Mexico, I'll check it out for sure. Also in Mexico is Mata Ortiz pottery which produces well-crafted knock-offs of Ancestral Puebloan and Mogollon pottery. Ever onward..... Netherzone (talk) 02:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, Wow! That is more than I ever imagined. It's thrilling to know that so many people are now aware of this beautiful work. I'm doing research now for an article about Sara Fina Tafoya, the matriarch potter from Kha'po Owingeh - it is astonishing how many generations of women artists in her family and extended family she was a role model for, taught, inspired. Have a wonderful new year! Netherzone (talk) 13:26, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
A quote from Gargantua and Pantagruel by Rabelais; it is taken from the manuscript of Jules Massenet's opera Panurge, in the composer's own hand. It is my greeting of choice for the new year, because it encourages us to live joyfully, and try not to take life too seriously...while quaffing whatever beverage we choose, naturally. This has been a challenging year, to say the least; I hope that 2021 may bring a fresh start, and better days ahead. May the new year bring you joy and peace...and many days of fruitful editing.
@Gerda Arendt: thank you for your note and the beautiful image. I will check out the QAI project topics as you suggest, and will also look at the private link. On another note, I wanted to let you know that I'm having such a wonderful time working on the new Pueblo pottery article, it has been such a rewarding experience, and my bookshelves are brimming with new books. The very best to you, Netherzone (talk) 19:56, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Happy Wikipedia 20, - proud of a little bit on the Main page today, and 5 years ago, and 10 years ago, look: create a new style - revive - complete! I sang in the revival mentioned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, How wonderful that you sang in the revival! It must be thrilling to see the Main Page today! Happy 20th bday to Wikipedia - the project is such a remarkable contribution to the culture. It never ceases to amaze me. There is so much to learn of this world we live in. Thank you for all the work you do. Netherzone (talk) 17:56, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
The revival was long ago, and the DYK 5 years ago ;) - Today is rather a Main page as usual, with a war for FA, - couldn't believe it. 10 years ago, there was a contest for something uplifting, and the complete works by Bach were just fitting. No such attempt this year, but the coincidence worked fine after all, - Mozart operas dear to my heart. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:59, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Well, that was good luck, I took a few, and that one came out best, Advent candle and uplifting gesture of holding a moment. There were trombone players high up on the left who needed big conductor's signals. On the other pic in the article, with just strings and oboes all close by (and wearings masks, due to stricter rules a month later), he conducted from the organ, playing, so small gestures or none. Coming early to have a good seat provides the opportunity of listening in for some rehearsal. The other pic was taken during the service (which I hate to do) because I was a few seconds late. Same male soloists whose articles I wrote in 2011 ;) - small world. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:01, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: What a beautiful memorial tribute and a great article on Kohl. That he was the world expert on Stockhausen and a superb Wikipedian is awesome! I will have to check out his articles; thank you for making me aware of him and his work. I really like what you said on his talk page, that you hope that the two of them are making joyous music together where ever they may be in the beyond. Netherzone (talk) 15:20, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
I agree completely about the articles! - Read that again on the talk: that was his wording, about Stockhausen and a friend of mine. Yes, I hope the same for him and Stockhausen, but would not have had the idea without him. Check his archives for my name, - we had great discussions about the pieces! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:34, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, thanks for letting me know that that was his wording. A beautiful thought. Will check the archives for your discussions. I am marveling at how prolific he was as a Wikipedian - so many great articles created; so many contributions to the encyclopedia. Netherzone (talk) 15:39, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Agree, and wonderfully humble at the same time. When he approached me (see my talk for detail) he didn't say that he was the world's expert on Stockhausen, just that S. didn't compose music for Siegfried Palm, even if a source said so ;) - it's still on the article talk, dated 2009. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:47, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello @Gerda Arendt: I have done my first review of a DYK, Mikiko (choreographer) an interesting Japanese woman who uses advanced technology in her performances. I hope I did it correctly, I used the DYK Review Template which provided a fairly easy guide to check on the appropriate criteria in the article. Exciting! Netherzone (talk) 18:30, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Tagging question
Hi there, you recently tagged the Leadville, CO article. Please explain your problems with the article's photos on the talk page and I will take care of them. Thanks. Gandydancer (talk) 05:55, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Gandydancer and thank you for your message. I did not tag the article photos, so I'm not sure what you mean about that. I did, however, place a maintenance tag for the article overall, as it currently contains 87.9% copyright violation material. See these two links: Here and Here. That material needs to be removed or those parts of the article need to be rewritten unless it can be ascertained that it is copyright free information. Thank you for your concern, and offering to take care of the problem. Have a good 2021! Netherzone (talk) 14:00, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Possibly, I think the AfD will be withdrawn, the nominator has suggested this themself. My guess is that the few existing works of this artist are all in museum collections. It's fun to connect the dots. On a different note, I want to commend you for your patience with the Tomos Roberts article - I think that is solely the most promotional art article I've ever seen. Netherzone (talk) 00:36, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Ha! Re: Tomos Roberts, I agree. It should probably go to AfD as it is borderline. That was some kind of ultra-layered baloney sandwich huh? In any case, I think it is you who should be commended for all the good work you do here, as Bearian noted above. Possibly (talk) 00:53, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello Netherzone... You're always very polite and considerate in corresponding with others, so I'll assume good faith here. I didn't intend anything to be promotional in nature. I simply wanted to be as thorough as possible and, well, when I commit myself to something, I typically only have one gear. For better or worse, I'm also a perfectionist. Being new to Wikipedia, it hasn't always been without issue, but I continue to learn and my intentions have always been genuine. Rather than belittling my attempts (more or less), you should, perhaps, encourage folks like me - individuals who are willing to dedicate much time and energy (to editing), who are able to compose well in English (and French) and who could ultimately benefit the Wikipedia community.
Cheers,
Ryan (Ryancoke2020 (talk) 02:07, 19 January 2021 (UTC))
Ryancoke2020, Hello and good to hear from you. Please forgive me if my wording sounded belittling, that was not the best choice of words on my part. I'm glad you reached out, and I'll respond in a longer message soon. Your thoroughness is remarkable. What made the article sound promotional was contextual. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. From my way of thinking, you wrote a really great piece for a different venue. A more concise tone and format may work better. PS the notability tag is no big deal, it gives other editors a chance to have a look at the article and discuss. Things don't happen on clock time here since volunteers are from all over the globe. Netherzone (talk) 02:40, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Netherzone... Thank you, kindly, for reaching out. I do appreciate the encouraging words - truly! Perhaps 'belittling' was too strong of a characterization. I just worked really hard to research all that information and to write as much as I did, but I do understand where I missed the boat. I really should have started MUCH smaller and incrementally developed upon what was submitted. I swung for the fences on my first try... LOL! Again, thank you for your kindness and guidance. It provides encouragement during these, assuredly, difficult times!
Cheers,
Ryan (Ryancoke2020 (talk) 02:54, 19 January 2021 (UTC))
Hi! Thanks for putting up that photo -- I wouldn't have known about that new book ("Isabella lake cultural resources") without it. I was trying to figure out who the people in the photo are; they're certainly related to people I know. (Their last name is probably either Chico or Apalatea.) --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 20:02, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi and wow, how cool is it that you know people related to those in that photo! There is also a photo of some Tüibatulabal children. Which I was thinking of uploading to Commons, but I hesitated because, well, they were children when photographed and I'm guessing did not give their consent. Maybe I'm being too sensitive. If I do upload it I will add it to the Tüibatulabal article, and if there are objections, it can be removed and deleted. Thanks for reaching out @Jpgordon:. Netherzone (talk) 20:12, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
I hope the hot springs article doesn't get deleted, though I fear its notability is minor. How come you keep spelling Tubatalabl with an "i"? I live in Kernville, and like many small towns, many people here are related to each other. "Myrna Sweeney", credited with many of the photos in that book, was my wife's 2nd grade teacher. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 20:22, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
I just fixed all those typos - my mistake that I kept repeating! I too hope the Scovern Hot Springs article does not get deleted. I spent a lot of time improving it from the 3-sentence stub it was when nominated for deletion. Whether or not it gets deleted, the research has been fascinating. I grew up in Los Angeles; wen I was a kid we camped at Lake Isabella. In the decades since I've taken many road trips to inland California and Mojave desert areas for photography. Interesting that your wife's elementary school teacher was Myrna Sweeney! Kernville seems like a sweet place to live. Netherzone (talk) 20:31, 28 January 2021 (UTC) Add ping @Jpgordon:Netherzone (talk) 20:33, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
It's a lovely place to live; utterly inconvenient, though. The nearest decent restaurant is a 120 mile round trip to Bakersfield (and then you're in Bakersfield.) I couldn't live up here without Amazon and Blue Apron. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 20:56, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Eddie891, thank you! I really enjoyed the process of researching that little known hot spring and former settlement. Glad to know the article was kept. Re: the name, I have no preference either way, but maybe Mangoe does as they do so much great work on geographic articles. Netherzone (talk) 18:45, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
On 7 February 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pueblo pottery, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Pueblo pottery(example pictured) has been created by Pueblo people and their antecedents in the Southwestern United States and Northern Mexico for almost two thousand years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pueblo pottery. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Pueblo pottery), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Sdkb, Thank you for the kind words about the Pueblo pottery article. I really enjoyed creating it and learned so much in the process. Now I need to figure out if it might be possible to bring it to "good article" quality, and read about how that process works. I struggle with writing, am much more of a visual person. Netherzone (talk) 15:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the article. I believe it has GA potential. I'd go over the images and move more to the right, the more "natural" side, where they don't displace headers. Sourcing looks great. I think Aza24 might be a good reviewer for this. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:15, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, thank you for nominating it. Through observing you and others, I think I'm getting the hang of how the DYK procedure works. (Did my first review the other day.) It would be a good adventure to try to refine the Pueblo pottery article. Will read about how the GA process works. Thanks for suggesting Aza24 as a possible reviewer, it will be good to have some other eyes to help identify any problematic areas or wording. I will reach out to htem. Hope all is well in your world, I enjoy your latest photo - Helebore, amazing how hearty it is. Soon the snowdrops will be up! Netherzone (talk) 15:30, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Today, we have a DYK about Wilhelm Knabe, who stood up for future with the striking school children when he was in his 90s, - a model, - see here. - Further down on the page, there are conversations about the current arb case request - I feel I have to stay away - in a nutshell: "... will not improve kindness, nor any article". - Yesterday, I made sure on a hike that the flowers are actually blooming ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, hello! Thank you for your message, it's always lovely to hear from you. I will read the article on Knabe, and also check out the convos about the arb case. I try to stay out of drama on WP, but it's always good to know what's going on. Is it about the infobox debate? Improving kindness and improving articles is the way to go. How nice you saw blooming flowers on your hike yesterday. I'm going on an urban walk with a friend today, but we still have snow on the ground. Looking forward to when the snowdrops emerge once it melts. They always bring such joy each spring. Galanthus elwesii - Giant snowdrop 2020-03-07 10Netherzone (talk) 15:51, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Soldiers Monument
I notice your extensive work on this topic and don't want to duplicate effort. I can add an early history section -- quotes from 1860s legislature on intent, information from the marble works, on use of controversial word "rebel," etc with citations -- which may take awhile. I have much of the information already. Just don't want to add it only to find the work was unnecessary or duplicative.
Thanks
VT440genoa (talk) 22:51, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
VT440genoa, hello and thank you for your message and for reaching out. To my way of thinking, the best way to go about it, (since some changes could be viewed as controversial), is to post the proposed additions and citations on the article talk page so that the editors who are working on the article or watching it can have an opportunity to discuss the proposed changes, per Wikipedia's consensus and collaboration model WP:CONSENSUS. Any one of those editors may add it to the article (or not) thus you would not be duplicating your work. We might also discuss the actual phrasing as well, to make sure the grammar/syntax is correct, and how the info is organized. How does that sound? Netherzone (talk) 23:13, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Netherzone, thanks again for your suggestions. I am waiting for another email response, but at the moment I have a split decision: your recommendation to post a draft on the article talk page with another editor suggesting just put it out there. At the moment, I am looking at content and citations/source material, with the ever present concern of remaining neutral on this sensitive topic. I plan to avoid recent events, for now, but can add much on the history based on online sources, recent books, articles, etc. Proposed history subheads, as I see them now, might be: Legislative intent 1866-1867, memorial to New Mexico's Civil War Union dead —- Initial construction 1867 —- October 1867 Laying cornerstone, time capsule -— Controversy 1/Legislative intent II 1867-1868, expands to include Indian Wars dead soldiers -– Completing construction to June 1868 -- Meaning and symbol during 19th century: Union veterans' touchstone -— Annual Memorial Day ceremonies to 1930s -— Controversy 2: Remove word “Rebel” on monument or remove entire monument, an insult to the South, 1880–1930 -— Meaning and symbol early twentieth century: Historic relic -— Controversy 3, early removal proposals 1930s-1960s: a festive gazebo instead? -— Historic preservation efforts mid-twentieth century -- Controversy 4 1970s-2020, indigenous people's symbol of repression. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VT440genoa (talk • contribs) 20:53, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Netherzone, Well, OK. I just copied the draft subheads to another editor's talk page, with the usual last minute tweaking (making it different than the above). So, I'll go over to the monument talk page and tweak it there, too. Best wishes and, again, let me know if you have suggestions. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by VT440genoa (talk • contribs) 21:23, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
re: Racist personal attacks by IP: User:142.162.218.244
I was shocked by what you had to endure from User:142.162.218.244, and you have my sympathy. I recently faced a similar issue with another editor, but nothing approaching what you had to deal with. Thank you for doing the right thing, revert, warn and report. Rklahn (talk) 00:05, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Rklahn, thank you for reaching out. Sorry to hear that you faced a similar issue. There are some very sick individuals out there but I believe that 99% of WP editors are good faith, at least that is what I have experienced. This one was over the top. I've never made an ANI report in the 9 years I've been here but it seemed necessary to take action in this case. The best to you, and thanks again for your note. Netherzone (talk) 00:33, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi - I was just coming to say that I would have blocked immediately for the first talk page post had I seen it. Yes, we usually go down the 'warn before block' route for silly vandalism, but racial abuse is so beyond the pale it doesn't require a warning - if you see something like that again, don't feel that you have to engage with them by issuing warnings - just report at AIV and they'll be blocked. Cheers GirthSummit (blether)11:08, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Girth Summit, thank you for letting me know I can just report something like this to AIV, and not bother with the warnings. I wasn't sure which notice board to use. If it happens in the future I now know what to do. I appreciate your feedback. Netherzone (talk) 14:05, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Netherzone - "Santa Fe Plaza" -- please see my comments under my talk page for VT440genoa. I can copy them here if that would be easier. My talk page discussion with KidAd, again, gives each of our points of view. I think the new additions helps the reader understand the physical evolution of this nationally significant public space. VT440genoa (talk) 22:07, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
VT440genoa, Please use the article talk page, it is located here: Talk:Santa Fe Plaza to discuss proposed edits. I agreed with KidAd's comments that much, but not all, of the content seemed promotional in a way that suggests it is intended to promote tourism or travel. While I agree with you that it's interesting to include some historical facts, the way it was presented was not entirely encyclopedic in tone. Some of the sourcing was weak, please use reliable sources WP:RS and also see WP:CITE.
As you are getting used to the way things work here on Wikipedia in relation to consensus and other policies and guidelines, I suggest that you use to the talk page of the article so that multiple editors can weigh in, and you don't risk getting blocked for edit warring. There are several tutorials you can take (ask if you need help finding them). Also, please do read the policy links KidAd recommended, and also those I recommended on the Soldiers' Monument (Santa Fe, New Mexico) talk page. Netherzone (talk) 22:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
netherzone - Thanks, as always, for your level-headed comments. What are the steps for arbitration? I may have to finally disagree with KiddAd re the manner of his comments, citing guidelines rather than giving helpful or substantial assistance on topic content, details, or value. I will send him another note, and follow your suggestions to offer on the talk page the new material so he can offer his suggestions there. By the way, I have a Ph.D. in history. So, that is my focus when editing or adding new material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VT440genoa (talk • contribs) 22:51, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Arbitration? It is perplexing why you would consider that in relation to a good faith editor such as KidAd who is trying to help maintain encyclopedia standards. But the choice is yours. You can ask at the TeaHouse or Helpdesk WP:TEAHOUSEWP:HELPDESK. I don't think I can help you further other than to encourage you to use article talk pages. Netherzone (talk) 23:05, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Netherzone, thanks again for your comments and suggestions. I'll follow your suggestion and put material up on the Santa Fe Plaza talk page. And thanks for the links to the Teahouse and Helpdesk. kidAd, I have found too many of your comments not within the WP guidelines for civility. VT440genoa (talk) 23:30, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
If you are familiar with WP:CIVIL, you may have read the line other editors may seem oversensitive when their views are challenged. You cannot improve without internalizing constructive criticism. KidAdtalk23:42, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
I am not interested in persuing this dialog on my personal talk page. Please take it to the respective article talk pages. Thank you. Netherzone (talk) 23:51, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Just a heads up that they will not run checkuser at SPI (for User:Basajaun67) without diffs or other evidence. (Update: CU does not matter for this one, as it turns out it is globally blocked!) --- Possibly (talk) 19:54, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Possibly, Hi! Thanks for letting me know about the diffs, next time I'll include them. Good thing that user is globally blocked. Although I have a feeling the multi-headed hydra may be back. Too bad they don't realize that the more they push the more cultural credibility they lose.
Hi, Jpgordon, the settlement is gone but the hot springs sustain! Thanks for making that edit re: Lake Isabella Valley, I re-read the citation and it was a mistake in my original reading that HS Valley & LI Valley were interchangable. Hope all is well there. Here in NY we are finally having spring-like weather after a long cold winter (much snow was shoveled). Netherzone (talk) 20:48, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
While we're suffering spring-like weather today but it there's a good chance of rain and some chance of snow tonight and for the next few days, which we desperately need; it's droughty out here this year! --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 23:26, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
@Beccaynr: thank you for the stardust! And thank you for improving the article as well, I'm glad you fixed the lead and found all those citations. I have a feeling, with the recent re-release of the band's material and recognition she is getting for her photos, we will be hearing more about her in the future. It feels good to save an article on a spirited and talented woman like her. Ever onward! Netherzone (talk) 23:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt Thank you, as always, for your kind message and the flower photo. Here, the crocuses are blooming - first the purple and now yellow. The snowdrops are still going strong! The daffodils will bloom in a few days. Netherzone (talk) 16:02, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
The purpose of the wikilink to the redirect in that section (and the existence of the redirect at all) is to indicate Baillie's significance (her WP:ONEVENT role in the Ross/Brand controversy). Without the wikilink, there would be little point in naming the vocalist of the Poussez Posse - few people respond to the name "Georgina Baillie" but say to them "Oh you remember, Andrew Sachs's granddaughter from that whole fuss with Johnathan Ross and Russell Brand in 2008," then a refrigerator light pops on in most peoples' heads. Switching that mental lightbulb on is the communicative purpose of placing that wikilink.Romomusicfan (talk) 09:27, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Romomusicfan, Hi good to hear from you, how are you doing during these pandemic times?
We disagree about the Georgina Baillie link in the Women in punk rock article. The subject of Women in punk rock is just that, contributions women have made to the punk rock genre. The article is focused on music.
The navigational wikilink redirect from the name Georgina Baillie to the Russell Brand Show prank article is completely trivial to the subject of this (WiPR) article and has nothing whatsoever to do with her music.
Why don’t you WP:WTAF - write the article (on her) first? If she is not notable enough to be able to sustain her own article, the navigational wikilink redirect should not be there unless it points to her musicianship, band, acting, or creative accomplishments as an artist. To have it point to the equivalent of tabloid fodder is just silly, gossipy and a real stretch. It lowers the credibility of the Women in punk rock article. Wikipedia is not a repository of links.
If the wikilink pointed to a (new) article about her that would be great, and would make sense and would be relevant to have her name linked. If she is not notable enough for her own article, then it does her a disservice to link her to a scandal rather than to her music or acting. We certainly are not doing her any favors by having a link in an article about women’s music to her grandfather being punked by Brand. As a living person I’m sure she’d much rather be known for her work in the performing arts rather than an abusive stunt by Brand. Why reopen that wound and put it on display in the WiPR article? See WP:NOTSCANDALNetherzone (talk) 13:48, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
I have every respect for your concern over the dignity of Baillie and - individually and collectively - the various female musicians on the WIPR page, but the redirect for Baillie is the correct Wikipedia procedure for persons covered under WP:ONEEVENT. A redirect Wikilink to the Saschsgate page is certainly more compliant with Wikipedia policies than, say, putting "Her Out Of That Brand/Ross Business" next to GB's name as a means of indicating her significance to the reader.
A couple of related points of interest -
(1) Regarding the possibility of a Wikipedia article on Georgina Baillie - there were attempts in 2008 at the time of "Sachsgate" to create a page on her relating to her previous burlesque career and there has been a discussion page thread at [1] running for nine years on the prospects of her getting a Wikipedia article of her own.
(2) It's worth considering that with both Poussez Posse's most noted song during its own lifetime "Rubber Medusa" and Baillie's collaboration with Adam Ant "Gun In Your Pocket" (B-side of his "Cool Zombie" single), the subject matter of both songs is "Sachsgate" so it's not exactly something she likes to play it down, least of all in her music career. Romomusicfan (talk) 14:50, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
If anything, Georgina Baillie's name should redirect to the Poussez Posse article or Adam Ant. However because The Featherz already has a link to the main page, we do not need to have Bailllie's name linked at all. Since she is not notable as per the efforts you cite above (that discussion is 10 years old, has anything changed since then?) her name should be left unwikilinked, or linked to another music article, because......WIPR is an article about women's contributions to music. Netherzone (talk) 15:06, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Furthermore, Sachsgate was harmful to Baillie, here is what she had to say about the incident to the Guardian, a reliable source: [2]
"It was unbelievably horrible," she says. "It was like walking around naked; it was so exposing, so unfair."
"It really messed up my relationship with them (her grandparents) because who wants their grandparents to know who they sleep with?
“He (her grandfather) felt hurt at being dragged into such a sordid tale; she felt ashamed of her part in it. They didn't meet, or speak, for a long time. "I felt like I had a massive gap in my life," says Georgina. "I hate making anyone miserable or unhappy. And even though this wasn't my fault, I felt guilty about it."
Here's what Adam Ant had to say: "Georgie had gone through real hell over this and because of it she'd missed out on three years of her grandfather's love."
This woman was dragged through the coals by a mean and abusive prank by Brand and tabloid coverage thereof. I feel very strongly that the WIPR article should not spread more harm to this woman, to do so is unkind and unnecessary. Netherzone (talk) 15:24, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Well if you want to challenge the use of the Sachsgate page as the target for the Georgina Baillie redirect, feel free, but that seems to be the consensus among Wikipedia editors as to where her Redirect should point unless/until someday she achieves independent wiki-notability. (I myself was not involved in said discussions.) Alternatively you could try writing her a page. Here is a previous attempt by someone. Romomusicfan (talk) 16:41, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
I do hear you Netherzone, but there is a wider consensus than myself about the redirect target. See for example [3] Unsigned comment by Romomusicfan
I think you are making this overly complicated, and are not hearing me. What I am saying: Georgina Baillie's name should not be linked in the Women in punk rock article unless the wikilink points to her work as a musican. It does not, therefore I removed the link. There is nothing wrong with having her name unlinked. The article is already too overlinked as it is. Netherzone (talk) 17:38, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Well OK, but you may find other editors coming along at a later date going "Who is this Georgina Baillie then, and why is she important enough to get mentioned?" And if they look her up and find out who - or if they happen to know already - they may just simply reinstate the Wikilink to the redirect.Romomusicfan (talk) 16:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Romomusicfan, sigh, are you being sincere or sarcastic? The reason I ask is that it does not give me a lot of confidence since you have used so many IPs to edit in the past, at least ten. Nevertheless I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not here to create unnecessary drama as we both can do without that. Netherzone (talk) 16:46, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Asking for an opinion from the person who originally created the redirect.
It was 100 years ago. I didn't "create the redirect". What I did was move an article that someone created "about her" to being an article about Brandt and his antics. If she was notable for her music and art (and I've no clue about that) then a biography on her might be appropriate - but if the notability is really Brant's misbehaviour that should not justify an article on the hapless victim. Beyond that, I'm not active here anymore to know what the current standards are. But, if in doubt, do no harm. Associating a victim with the abuse should only be done where it is clearly justified. If in doubt, don't. (I'm so inactive, I don't even know how to sign this anymore) Unsigned comment by Scott MacDonald
Thanks Scott MacDonald, I think the attempts to create a page were done some time in the late Noughties mainly on account of her work in burlesque (which clearly didn't pass the notability threshold).
The issue is whether it is appropriate (as has been done on quite a fair number of articles where she is mentioned for whatever reason) to wikilink to the redirect as a shorthand to the reader to explain who this Georgina Baillie person is and why she is significant enough to warrant a mention. To be fair, the "Sachsgate" article does contain a specific section on her music and particularly on some of her better known specific works - Rubber Medusa, Gun In Your Pocket - which relate to the whole episode.
I'm not pushing any more for the reinstatement of the link on the actual Women in Punk Rock article but I would still defend its wider use on Wikipedia of which, as I said, there is plenty. 01:31, 26 March 2021 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Romomusicfan (talk • contribs)
Scott MacDonald thank you for your kind response. I agree that when in doubt, do no harm; and that it is not necessary to revictimize someone who has been abused. Pinging Romomusicfan so they understand your take on it. Cheers, Netherzone (talk) 18:36, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
California genocide "did not appear constructive" argument for removal
Ref: California genocide "did not appear constructive"
Hi Netherzone! The original text was:
"Spanish and Mexican rule were devastating for native populations. “As the missions grew, California’s native population of Indians began a catastrophic decline.”[10] Gregory Orfalea estimates that pre-contact population was reduced by 33% during the Spanish and Mexican regimes. Most of the deaths stemmed from imported diseases and the disruption of traditional ways of life, but violence was common, and some historians have charged that life in the missions was close to slavery.[11]"
My modification was:
"Even with their imperfections, the Laws of the Spanish Crown protected the native population [10]. Once the territory became part of independent Mexico their rights were stripped and Spanish missionaries were forced to leave the new country. The missions were dismembered and their land distributed under the Mexican Secularization Act of 1833. Later, when the territories were incorporated to The United States under the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, the indigenous population was considered a nuisance by both countries and The United States pursued a policy of physical elimination."
Your removal is based on "did not appear constructive". In my humble opinion the previous text "did not appear constructive".
The impression given is that all white people were a danger for the natives when it is not true.
My arguments are the following:
"Spanish and Mexican rule were devastating for native populations" is not accurate, at least for the Spanish period.
Missions were stablished to convert natives to Christianity and assimilate them under the Spanish Empire standards (language, religion, laws, trade, currency, military projection...). Those under the mission jurisdiction were complied to some "forced labour". Spanish laws protected indians against abuses, albeith this protection was not always enforced. "Some historians have charged that life in the missions was close to slavery" is biased as you may also write that "some historians praised the presidio-missions assimilation system".
The was some enforced labour for few days each year, impossible to assimilate to slavery. Natives had civil rights a slave would never imagine.
My point is -. Under the Spanish Empire natives had a protection from the State and were entitled some rights, even if some cases enforcement was difficult (I quoted the text of the Indian Laws enacted by the Spanish Crown) -. Under Mexican independence the missions system was disbanded offering no viable protection to the natives as Law enforcement did before. -. Under the US jurisdiction the State of California passed laws directed to the native population extermination as it is stated in the next paragraphs of the same Wikipedia article. Bounties were paid to those who showed up with "redskin" scalps.
In consequence:
I ask you to reconsider your removal and publish back my version.
Yours,
Carlos Enrile D'Outreligne — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.60.126.244 (talk) 12:21, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Firstly, I do not find anything in the article that mentions the word "redskin"; it is offensive, do not use it again here.
Secondly, your edit [4] removed content and two verifiable independently-sourced citations to reliable references: the New York Times and the Santa Cruz Sentinel and associated content. Because, it seems, you did not agree with them. Countless other sources support the content that your edit removed, for example:[5], [6], [7], the books "A Cross of Thorns: The Enslavement of California's Indians by the Spanish Missions" (Elias Castillo),[8] and many others. Your edit replaced that sourced content with primary material based on a 1893 text about a 1542 law about the "West Indies" in general, not on California specifically.
By removing the NYT/SCS-sourced content in the article, it disrupted NPOV. A better option would have been to use the article talk page. Another option would have been to introduce your 16th C. source framed as a historical primary source (without removing content you personally disagree with.)
Either way, it's unconstructive to remove content that you personally disagree with - WP is based on verifiable reliable sources, not personal opinion. I hope that helps to explain why your edit was reverted. Netherzone (talk) 16:22, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
--
Hi again Netherthone:
1. On the term "redskin". I am Spanish from Spain and I have never heard it before and obviously I didn't know it was offensive.
I found it as a quoted term here, https://revcom.us/a/v21/1030-039/1039/gold1.htm
″In his January 1851 message to the California legislature, California Governor Peter H. Burnett promised "a war of extermination will continue to be waged between the two races until the Indian race becomes extinct." Newspapers cheered on the campaign. In 1853 the Yreka Herald called on the government to provide aid to "enable the citizens of the north to carry on a war of extermination until the last redskin of these tribes has been killed. Extermination is no longer a question of time--the time has arrived, the work has commenced and let the first man who says treaty or peace be regarded as a traitor." Other newspapers voiced similar sentiments.″
2. History is not about opinion, but about facts.
On the section I deleted, disrupting NPOV, I suppose can be amended adding other NPOV with a different approach, based in scientific sources. I ask for your advice before doing so.
"Your edit replaced that sourced content with primary material based on a 1893 text about a 1542 law about the "West Indies" in general, not on California specifically.":
Every historian on the Spanish Empire knows that this Law was enacted for all the territory, from Cape Horn to what is present day Oregon. The 1893 translation to English is the only one I found to enlighten English language speakers.
83.60.126.244 (talk) 22:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Oh, B.S. - you must know "redskin" is offensive; and the link you provided is not reliable. You have been warned that racial slurs are taken very seriously here. You are no longer welcome to post on my talk page. Netherzone (talk) 01:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gerda, hope you are well and enjoying the spring! Thank you for letting me know about Yoninah's tribute day. I saw the discussion about it, and I'm grateful for the reminder that today is the day when a selection of her articles are on the main page. It sounds like she was a wonderfully awesome, creative and brilliant person. Our paths did not cross, but after reading the discussion I realized that many of the catchy hooks and DIY articles were some of her contributions. What a tremendous mark she made on the encyclopedia for future generations. My condolences to you that your beloved friend and fellow editor left the earth too soon. Blessings to you. Netherzone (talk) 15:46, 26 April 2021 (UTC) Forgot to ping Gerda ArendtNetherzone (talk) 16:14, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
All good thoughts, but I wasn't clear: it's not her creations today, - that discussion is still ongoing I believe. I do my own memorial, as we worked on the psalms together as long as she could, doing a double hook of a psalm and a Christian hymn for Christmas, - she was such an open-minded spirit. El C is helping me with the Hebrew now. She would have added much more about Jewish usage. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:24, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Possibly (talk) 20:30, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
,_oil_painting_on_canvas.jpg){kind=link}
,_oil_painting_on_canvas.jpg){kind=link}
