User talk:Dodger67/Archives/2010/July

Joseph Merrick

Hello, as a member of WikiProject Disability, I was wondering if you would do me the favour of having a quick look at Joseph Merrick, an article I'm currently working on. Merrick (aka the Elephant Man) was famous for his physical deformities and was exhibited as a "freak" in Victorian England. Another editor suggested that I ask the advice of the members of the disability project with regard to whether or not the language used in the article is appropriate. For example, I'm trying to avoid labelling Merrick as a freak, but have still mentioned freak shows. In your opinion is this appropriate? I'd appreciate any input if you have the time. Don't worry if not. The project talkpage didn't look that active, so I thought I'd ask you directly, and I'm also asking User:Bib. Thanks, --BelovedFreak 23:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I've read it and I think its a really good article. Well done! Roger (talk) 10:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much! No problem with any of the language used?--BelovedFreak 10:48, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Nothing struck me as inappropriate. But then I am in principle opposed to using PC language on linguistic grounds and I also intensely dislike the intellectual dishonesty inherent in political correctness used for its own sake. You'll get no brownie points for calling me "differently abled" <puke> but I will give you a dirty look if you say I'm "wheelchair bound". But that's just me - others may of course disagree. Roger (talk) 11:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Ha, thanks. I think it's hard to strike that balance sometimes especially when some terms are ultra-PC in some countries but actually considered quite offensive in others. I can't imagine hearing someone use the term "mentally retarded" in the UK without being offensive, but it's apparently quite acceptable in the US. Anyway, I just wanted to cover all bases. It was pointed out to me that people may be more likely to read certain articles if they have a personal connection ie. that someone with deformities similar to Merrick's might be even more drawn to the article, so I didn't want to inadvertently call someone (by association) a freak in my zeal for telling good story! Again, thanks for your input.--BelovedFreak 11:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to post a (suitably redacted version) of this discussion to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disability so that others may also participate - just because the projects talk page is not as busy as others is no reason to avoid it - the project is still very new so traffic will hopefully increase - and the best way to increase it is to use it! Please continue the conversation there. Roger (talk) 12:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks that makes sense. I didn't realise the project was so new. I've added myself as there are some related articles I'd like to work on at some point.--BelovedFreak 12:14, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Brain Drain

Hi, I see you undid my edits to the Brain Drain page, under United States. I am a rural researcher and there are no verifiable sources to substantiate the "This has negatively impacted rural communities in the U.S." claim. I am wondering why you did so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.38.102 (talk) 05:35, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

The part that I found odd was the reference to high school graduates when the entire rest of the article is about university graduates in knowlege professions. I live in a rural village in South Africa, we have entire communities where nobody has and qualification higher than a high school certificate. Your edit implied that US rural communities don't even have HS graduates - I find that very hard to believe. Roger (talk) 06:48, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know what part of my edits implied that "US rural communities don't even have HS graduates." There is a statement there now: "This has negatively impacted rural communities in the U.S." This is just NOT true. Rural communities have nearly ALL lost their HS graduates, some of these towns are still gaining population and some are losing. This is an unverified claim and just not substantiated by research. However, that comment you did not remove. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.38.102 (talk) 23:16, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

There are many research articles and books here in the US that use the term to only mean high school graduates. That is what I mean when I edited to include "The use of the brain drain term in the United States tends to be a narrow definition encompassing just high school graduates, rather than those people with high skills and/or education." The book 'Hollowing out the Middle' by Patrick Carr also uses this narrow definition. I totally agree with you, and the worldwide definition of college graduates, which makes it so frustrating when here in the US the rural researchers are always talking about high school. I don't know how they can call it a brain drain when the young high school children have some of the lowest education and skills in the country. I only wanted to clarify the use of this term in the United States and its misuse. Thanks for responding. I hope you will re-allow my edits to remain to put this in to context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.38.102 (talk) 20:14, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

United States Sports Academy awards

Hello... sorry it has taken a while to pass this along. In a nutshell, the "award" information has been removed because it is nothing but spam, promotional material added by single-purpose editors over the past few years. I've even tracked down an AfD from 2007 that led to the deletion of over a dozen articles about the "awards". At the time, the nominator asserted that (with regard to the school's other practice of awarding honourary degrees) "there was no evidence that the 'recipients' were aware of or accepted the 'honorary degrees'". The current round were added over the past few weeks; when challenged, the SPA simply added a "reference" URL that is owned by the school. Hope this helps; I've posted it at Jacklee's talk page as well. Cheers. --Ckatz^chat_spy 02:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Towns in the Great Karoo

Greetings. I've taken a look at your work on SA stuff and its impressive. You deleted mention of a few towns in the Great Karoo. I think listing some towns found within the Great Karoo is appropriate to this article. Would you agree? Which towns warrant mention is another question. I went for some of the bigger ones, that's all. I suggest restoring the deleted section under a heading that says, "Towns and settlements". Perhaps the word "Notable towns" was the problem for you. ?? Incidentally, some of the towns of the Little Karoo are listed in the article. That doesn't seem to be a problem and indeed succinctly adds very useful detail to that section, IMO. Currently, no Great Karoo towns are directly mentioned at all. One is left to infer Laingsburg is there from captions to the lovely photos. What say you, shall we come up with a joint list of Great Karoo towns? BlandBaroque (talk) 04:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I'd tend towards listing them all but the real problem is to define the boundaries of the Karoo(s). As my background is agricultural - I grew up on a farm near Victoria West, Northern Cape - I tend to prefer a ecological/botanical definition - per Acocks' veld types Roger (talk) 10:52, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh gosh. Then I'm out of my depth. I was going to look at the boundaries of the map given in the article, overlay that on an atlas and name the towns within that area. I agree that the Karoo is primarily an ecological / botanical concept and so your way is strictly the most accurate. I'll leave it for later, then, when I have a botanical map, although I was looking forward to arguing what constitutes an actual town as opposed to a mere village like Victoria West ;) BlandBaroque (talk) 21:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

please re-delete

Hi, I recently saw that Wanya1 attempted to outed me on the Talk:Abahlali baseMjondolo page. This is why I have deleted that section as per wikipeda outing guidelines. Can you please revert to my edit deleting that section. Thanks. ps - I hope that this explains why my delete was not in bad faith. This is the second time Wanya1 has attempted to out me.Frombelow (talk) 12:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

The way I understand WP:OUTING it is revealing private information avbout an editor such as real name, phone number, etc. Discussing your self-declared bias is not outing. Roger (talk) 12:50, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

he did attempt to reveal personal information through the attempted outing. I have lodged a formal complaint but in the mean time according to those rules I have the right to remove that information from the page.Frombelow (talk) 13:56, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Since you wont remove it, I will have to? As per WP:OUTING: "Any edit that [attempts to] "outs" someone must be reverted promptly, followed by a request for Oversight to delete that edit from Wikipedia permanently." Frombelow (talk) 21:00, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Maybe I am stupid but I doubt it, so can you explain what about Wanya1's post constitutes outing, please be specific. Roger (talk) 19:04, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

If I can contact you privately, I will explain in more detail. I cannot (and have been advised by wiki guidelines not to explain on a public page.Frombelow (talk) 20:07, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

An administrator has explained the situation to me. I hope the matter is now resolved. Roger (talk) 10:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Same administrator has explained why they want deletion of retired editor's name from the Abahlali talkpage. Makes sense. Kindly see though my talk page for clarification and reply Wanya1 (talk) 04:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Louis Oosthuizen

Hello, Dodger! Did you have to remove the "English" pronunciation guide for Louis' name from the Wikipedia article? The IPA symbols by themselves are not helpful to most of us. (I hear it's against policy, but stupid rules are meant to be broken). I think we should have IPA and a pronunciation guide that's easy to use. And just for the record, I hear it as LOO-ee OOIST-eye-zən (from the External Link audio). What do you think? Kenatipo (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I didn't remove it, Xyzzyva moved it to a footnote, with an explanation that it should stay there until we can get it sorted out properly.

See this diff [1]

BTW what you hear is a lot more accurate than the rubbish currently in the footnote. I think we should keep the discussion centralised on the article's talk page, rather than scattering it all over various user talk pages. Roger (talk) 16:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Dodger, I was talking about this edit [2] which removed the "re-spelling".

Thank you, Roger. I'll put something on the L O discussion page. --Kenatipo (talk) 19:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

ADA importance

Hi. I think it was I who set importance at Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 to Low. Reason being that any article which concentrates on one country only shouldn't have importance=High. FYI. --Hordaland (talk) 09:16, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I think you may be right, it is just about one country but it is a very important law which is talked about even outside the US. Maybe its a candidate for a Mid importance rating? But I think we should discuss this at the Project, not on my talk page. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disability/Assessment#Rating the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 article Roger (talk) 09:45, 27 July 2010 (UTC)