User talk:Sunray/Archive26

Proposed Tibetan naming conventions
A while back, I posted a new proposal for Tibetan naming conventions, i.e. conventions that can be used to determine the most appropriate titles for articles related to the Tibetan region. This came out of discussions about article titles on Talk:Qamdo and Talk:Lhoka (Shannan) Prefecture. I hope that discussions on the proposal's talk page will lead to consensus in favour of making these conventions official, but so far only a few editors have left comments. If you would be interested in taking a look at the proposed naming conventions and giving your opinion, I would definitely appreciate it. Thanks&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 16:23, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

DIREKTOR
Is at six posts today already by my count. Just a head's up, this is getting a bit ridiculous. --Nuujinn (talk) 13:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Archiving?
If we're done with Karchmar, could be archive that section, or any others? The load times are pretty bad again. --Nuujinn (talk) 12:37, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

First draft
I put up the first draft at Talk:Draža Mihailović/ethnic conflict drafts, just a head's up since my quiver's empty for today on the talk page. --Nuujinn (talk) 19:33, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the Advice
Hi Sunray,

Thanks for the advice on writing wiki articles. In a recent post, you noted that I may have a conflict of interest. I just wanted to let you know that I have no such conflict. Currently, I'm pursing my doctorate in philosophy with an emphasis on environmental philosophy and agrarian ethics and I enjoy writing about this topic. I noticed when reading wiki articles that some did not adequately deal with current developments and current figures and I wanted to rectify that. I didn't intend to give the impression that I had a particular agenda other than providing up to date information. In the future I will be sure to ask an editor to proofread any new articles to obtain feedback and to limit the possibility of deletion. Thanks again and enjoy your weekend. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dyname42 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. Your edit about the ethics of sustainability in the Sustainability article (which I reverted) raised some concern with me as your arguments were all sourced from one book, Sustainability Ethics: 5 Questions. Then I noticed that most of your recent edits were about various of the authors of articles in that book. What is going on? You say there is no conflict of interest. Does that mean that you are not one and do not know any of the editors or authors you have cited? Please do not continue to reinsert the edits to the Sustainability article without first discussing them on the article talk page. Sunray (talk) 09:22, 25 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I am not an author of the book nor have I met the editors of the book. I am just a graduate student. However, I know that sustainability ethics is a developing field that is hot right now in the same way that development ethics is. I thought that the book I cited was the best one to use in this instance because it has articles from several leading authors working in the field. As it is a new field, the amount of literature specifically devoted to it is sparse. However, I can rewrite the section using several different sources and have you look at it. Would this be OK? As a person who is interested in this topic, I think that any article on sustainability would be lacking without having at least a mention of sustainability ethics. Especially, since the concept of sustainability itself is rooted within the normative frameworks of those who both coined their conceptions of it and who have tried to use it. Also, I would be happy to help update or polish any articles connected with this topic or on philosophy in general that you might be editing to make better. I'm not here to push an agenda, I just want the information on wikipedia to be correct and the most up to date that it can be. I noticed last year that many undergraduates use wikipedia without question and so, with a summer of time on my hands, I thought I would add to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.206.112.63 (talk) 13:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That's all good. Writing for an encyclopedia is rather different than academic writing. One thing the two genres have in common, as you have already understood, is the citation of reliable sources. Broadening a topic by using various references is a good idea. There is one other thing that is characteristic of Wikipedia: collaborative editing. Editorial decisions are made by consensus. That can be challenging, but, for the most part, I find it rewarding. The article on sustainability is a good example of collaboration. And because it is rated as a good article, major changes will need discussion. I appreciate your willingness to do that. Granitethighs and I have been talking about improving it to featured article status. To do so would require the efforts of several editors. BTW, don't forget to sign your posts by adding four tildes, ~ thus. The mark-up language will add your username, talk page link and a time/date stamp. How are things in Lansing these days? Hot, I bet. Sunray (talk) 17:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Sustainability
Thanks for keeping me in the loop Sunray: it would be great to lift the article up a notch. Just on the various points.

I’m painfully aware of article “ownership” issues which I am keen to avoid, but maybe some of the above seems uncooperative. Perhaps it is best to simply propose changes on the talk page so that we can discuss them as we go along?  Granitethighs  23:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * On “infinite sustainability”: as I understand it the heat death of the universe (i.e. entropy) will spoil the party for absolutely everything. I’m not sure how productive or meaningful it is to pursue this point. But perhaps I’ve missed something?
 * I agree that life-cycle analysis should be mentioned in the article – I thought it was … it certainly was at one time.
 * “the economic and engineering analysis of such manufactured technology tends to be ignored”. I thought the article addressed, however briefly, both the economic aspects of sustainability and the environmental and other impacts impact of all technology, from an “engineering” or any other perspective. However, again the point here is lost on me a bit. Perhaps a way forward is to collectively consider potential changes to the existing text?
 * I still do not follow what is meant by using the article for “political purposes” – this will have to be spelled out in simple terms for me.
 * "... while sustainability has become a prominent topic and popular buzz word within the past two decades, there is little consensus on its exact meaning." My thoughts on this are simple. Yes, a precise definition of sustainability would give us something firm to hold on to, a foundation stone on which to build. Unfortunately people approach sustainability in so many and diffuse ways that it is, to my mind, just not possible. To provide a definition would create more problems than it would solve: better to present some of the major attempts at definition to give the reader a taste of the different approaches. I think the “Definition” section actually does this about as clearly as could be hoped for, but I suppose we can look at it again.
 * On “Sustainability ethics” I think we have a tantalizing topic, especially as D says it is becoming “hot”. But then, on reflection, I cant help thinking that people will and “should” (sorry to be normative) also approach sustainability from the full gamut of belief systems, values, ethics and so on. Anyway – I’m in ignorance on the topic, very willing to learn, and if it is relevant, it should be mentioned in the article.
 * Thank you for your comments. My remarks were just the result of a first glance at the article. But it was interesting to see that some fairly key issues were moved to subarticles. That would be something to be addressed. I certainly will come back to the talk page with further comments. I just didn't want to get into more discussion about infinite sustainability, which I thought you handled just fine. :) Sunray (talk) 05:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Granitethighs, I agree with you about defining "sustainablity." The purpose of sustainability ethics is not to give one definition of this term. Rather, what such ethicists do is critique and make visible the positions from which the different usages or conceptions of sustainablity come from. Often, people have conversations dealing with sustainability and they are actually talking about different things. In addition, there's often debate over which action in a particular context is sustainable. Looking at the different conceptions of sustainablity helps people within such debates find common ground. Much of the literature on the subject actually deals with conflict resolution and policy making. It's one of the reasons why I enjoy reading the material as it's applied or practical philosophy. It's why I thought it should be included in the sustainability article, as it honors and makes visible these diverse positions. Dyname42 (talk) 03:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Draza Mihailovic mediation etc
Just to notify you that I topic banned DIREKTOR today for 6 months under ARBMAC.Fainites barley scribs 20:34, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Cover for MedCom chair
There's been no response to my mailing list post, so I've boldly named you the temporary chairman at WP:MC. If you're willing to cover my absence, could you do the usual: keep an eye on WP:RFM and accept/reject requests per normal procedure (check my changes to the recently accepted/rejected cases if you need to know how the templates and paperwork works); monitor WP:RFAR and delete then use WP:Mediation Committee/Chair/Privilege to blank the case, talk, and archive talk pages of any cases that are named in the course of a request for arbitration. I'll try to keep an eye on my wiki e-mail and forward any messages sent to User:Mediation Committee, so that doesn't need monitoring.

If you can't take these duties on until 31 August 2011, and somebody else can, please pass this message along. Thank you, and see you in just over a week! AGK [&bull; ] 11:50, 23 August 2011 (UTC)


 * No problem. Have fun! Sunray (talk) 18:42, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Mediation rejected for Vulva
There was no reason left as to why this is rejected. Please post a reason for the rejection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Circle3382 (talk • contribs) 00:06, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I note that the other party did not agree to mediate. That would seem to be a strong reason why the mediation did not proceed. Sunray (talk) 17:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Email question
Qwyrxian (talk) 03:40, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Qwyrxian. I am considering your question will get back to you shortly. Sunray (talk) 05:47, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Email
Hi Sunray. I sent an email to medcom-l but it was rejected automatically (not even held in moderation) so I have sent it to you instead. Could you forward it to medcom-l please? Thanks, Steven Zhang  The clock is ticking....  06:31, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Steve, I have forwarded your request to the MedCom list. I will get back to you shortly. Sunray (talk) 18:11, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Alright, thanks. Is it normal for the emails sent to medcom-l to be rejected automatically? From memory they used to be held in moderation. Odd. Anyways, thanks. Talk soon. Steven Zhang  The clock is ticking....  01:34, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I will check on the email situation. I have responses from the list about your request. The gist is: thanks for the offer, but no. However, there are 12 cases awaiting mediators at MedCab. Best wishes, Sunray (talk) 03:14, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Understood. I will see what I can do. Out of interest, were there any particular reasons, or was it mainly abundance of MedCab vs Medcom? Steven Zhang  The clock is ticking....  03:18, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Email sent. Sunray (talk) 05:36, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I have replied. Steven Zhang  The clock is ticking....  06:02, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Collaboration
Don't you think we should now move on the collaboration issue? BoDu (talk) 09:48, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes we should wrap it up. Thank you for staying with it. The piece on collaboration, is, as you know, the final piece. I will put the question on the article talk page. Sunray (talk) 16:01, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Moon landing
This redirect is up for discussion. Please see WP:RFD. Simply south...... creating lakes for 5 years 19:55, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Ref. to PoV on Roma people in CZ in Roma people article
I have several references to be added to my contribution on Roma people article:

Standing Roma people in czech economics http://www.dzeno.cz/docs/ROMECO_CZE.doc

Crime, living and unemployment of Roma people http://www.christnet.cz/magazin/clanek.asp?clanek=1278

Roma unemployment rate (2005): http://www.romea.cz/index.php?id=servis/z2005_0051

Point of view on Roma: http://aktualne.centrum.cz/domaci/spolecnost/clanek.phtml?id=475102

Current hate crime wave in the media: http://aktualne.centrum.cz/domaci/regiony/ustecky/clanek.phtml?id=713785# http://zpravy.idnes.cz/romove-z-noveho-boru-se-boji-odvety-vinu-davaji-i-obsluze-herny-pvx-/krimi.aspx?c=A110812_205754_liberec-zpravy_abr http://zpravy.idnes.cz/mistni-vedi-ze-delat-umime-rikaji-romove-z-varnsdorfske-ubytovny-p9z-/domaci.aspx?c=A110915_190121_usti-zpravy_alh

Following article about problems with education of young Roma: http://liberec.idnes.cz/deti-chudych-povinne-do-skolek-romove-nemaji-zajem-zni-z-boru-a-tanvaldu-1aj-/liberec-zpravy.aspx?c=A110916_1652790_liberec-zpravy_oks

Forced prostitution and welfare misusage: http://zpravy.idnes.cz/romove-se-zpovidaji-z-kuplirstvi-prostitutky-jim-vydelaly-miliony-1go-/krimi.aspx?c=A110816_124343_budejovice-zpravy_pp

I would also recommend merging main article with following http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiziganism, http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticikanismus those articles have references included within.

Is number of articles enough or should I dig out some more?

Robin WH (talk) 00:49, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * These are Czech sources, right? They might well be reliable sources for the Czech Wikipedia, but we need English ones for the English Wikipedia. If you want to pursue that, I would be willing to help. Sunray (talk) 00:58, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am willing to pursue, but all which might be neeeded is add the google translator to the links.Robin WH (talk) 17:59, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe the guidelines require that we use English sources or official translations of Czech sources. Sunray (talk) 18:01, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Then above mentioned Aniziganism article is ignoring those guidelines as it uses google translated articles as references. Robin WH (talk) 17:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * We should base our decisions on policies and guidelines rather than articles as some articles are not good examples. Antiziganism is rated "start class," whereas Romani people is assessed as "B" Class and considered "top-importance" by WikiProject Ethnic groups (see the box at the top of Talk: Romani people).
 * BTW, if the two articles were to be merged, the main article would be "Romani people." Are we clear on this? Sunray (talk) 18:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

OK, I did not know/noticed rating as such I was focusing on article as itself. I just don´t know where to find some things about czech in english as most common sources for czech (without errors) are czech only portals. So when I saw google trasnslator applied for czech sources on english wiki so I thought it was enough (otherwise it would be repaired). I think you should try use of translator at least on standing Roma in economics (date probably 2005-06), because it is thorough and is describing all I mentioned in my own words, and I admit, that I didn´t read it before you asked me for sources. As for merging, I wholly agree, it was my intention. Robin WH (talk) 01:26, 21 September 2011 (UTC)


 * There may not be many articles, but I'm sure we can find enough. Here's an article from the The European Roma Information Office (ERIO):
 * Inspectors from the Council of Europe have completed a "monitoring visit" to determine the Czech Republic's performance in upholding minority rights. The visit followed a report by Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner Thomas Hammarberg in March, 2011. In his Hammarberg criticised the Czech Republic's treatment of Roma people. The report called for greater efforts to include Roma in Czech society:
 * "[Hammarberg's report] said that an anti-Roma approach and ongoing segregation in education and housing are the main obstacles to including Roma people into Czech society. Hammarberg was disturbed by the anti-Roma statements made by some politicians and believes the Czech Republic should fight against extremists and racially motivated violence more effectively. He recommended the creation of social housing and an end to the practice of pushing Roma people into ghettos on the outskirts of towns. He also drew attention to the large number of children in children’s homes and to the high percentage of Roma children among them.

War of 1812 revert
Hey there, sorry I didn't know about that. A simple search of war of 1812 colts comes up with a good deal of coverage. I'll have to get around to inserting that, someday. Buggie111 (talk) 03:52, 17 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I realize that there is a rivalry between the two teams and I get that it is often referred to as a War of 1812. So I went through the links you sent me with interest. The first two are blogs, and don't meet the grade as reliable sources. The third one is ESPN, which is a reliable source, but doesn't link the War of 1812 to the Colts/Patriots rivalry. The fourth is NFL.com and does make the link, but says nothing about it. Fifth comes a Naval Weapons station and doesn't make the link. The sixth is a blog... and so on.


 * One of the considerations for including material in articles is notability. I'm wondering how notable this is and whether it has much traction other than with sportscasters, who are always looking for something to fill the air, repeating the statement that the rivalry between the two teams is like the War of 1812--which actually is a rather strange statement when you consider that the War of 1812 was fought between the U.S. and Canada. Sunray (talk) 05:32, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Bodhisattva
Hi Sunray,

The link to an online version is here: www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/dhamma-nibbana.pdf The reference is at the bottom of page 36.

Cheers,

Julian Jccraig (talk) 13:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The material you want to put into the article is not on that page in the version I download. I've downloaded it twice. I cannot search the document since it is apparently written in Pali or some other language (see my note on the article talk page. I have suggested that you quote that actual text there, so it can be verified. Then we will have to see how it fits in the article. Would you be willing to do that? Sunray (talk) 16:13, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Stanley Cup
I am trying to add a list of the roster of the 2011 Boston Bruins Stanley Cup Championship team. This list includes only names that are on the Stanley Cup, and team picture. I am the person who included the names of each Stanley Cup winning team from 1893 to date. Let me finish what in doing and you can see my end product. I will be saving several times, so I don't lose the information I am adding. You are wasting my time by stopping. I will keep trying until this info is added.


 * Why are you not letting me finish my work. I am going to work on this again tomorrow.  I want to included a list of all players and non-players who are on the Stanley Cup, and team picture with 2010-11 Boston Bruins.  It take me a while to add the info.  If I take too long  adding the information will not be excepted.  So I am adding a little bit and time, this way I don't lose my information.  Why am I not being aload to finish.  I am the person who added almost all the information on the roster of each Stanley Cup winning team form 1893 to date.  I want to add 2011, why you do keep stopping me?


 * There are some problems with the way you are adding this information, in my opinion. I want to discuss it with you. The article talk page would be the best place for that. Sunray (talk) 06:01, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

NPOV
I don't believe you understand NPOV. To say that Germans invaded France during World War II is an academic fact, not a violation of NPOV. Provide an academic source that suggests that Theravada's aggregates are indeed empty. LhunGrub (talk) 22:45, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I have responded, in detail, on the article talk page. Sunray (talk) 17:35, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your support regarding the recent edits to the "List of Canadians". It is unfortunate that they were reverted. Would it be possible for you to re-add this information that has been removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.19.34 (talk) 17:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The list has been moved. I've added Terry Ananny to List of Canadian artists. Sunray (talk) 17:37, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * FYI: Terry Ananny is a serial spammer who has been attempting to use Wikipedia and its sister projects for promotional purposes for years. All variations of "Terry Ananny" have been salted. The information from the spamming long-term abuse noticeboard can be found here.  freshacconci  talk talk  21:39, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I had no inkling of this history. Sunray (talk) 01:50, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * This artist is currently being referenced in Wikipedia articles and should be included in the List of Canadians as well as have an article :

Wikipedia Canadian Culture Reference Note 26 “Taking Sports Seriously” Thompson Publishing

Wikipedia Ice Hockey Reference Note 9 “Taking Sports Seriously” Thompson Publishing

Wikipedia Shinny Hockey Reference Note 1 “Taking Sports Seriously” Thompson Publishing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.244.53.169 (talk) 19:46, 13 October 2011 (UTC)