User talk:Mobtown Mongrel

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

Discworld[edit]

Your Discworld related edits seem to have broken (a lot of?) links. Lu Tze and the link from Walter Plinge no longer connect to the correct subsections of articles as you've moved lots of content around. Please use the "What links here" on the articles you've moved content from into new articles and fix the links to point to the correct sections on the new articles. Exxolon (talk) 19:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Um, right. OK. I'm not 100 percent sold on your new system; I think that if the article Ankh-Morporkians by institution is to exist then it should be combined with the biogs currently in the Discworld geography page, since that page is about geography, not biography. As to the rest, I'll need time to digest all you've done; right now I'm thinking that the articles suffer from character overload, but then, character overload has always been a problem with the Discworld. Serendipodous 20:04, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As to the first issue, I was thinking something along those lines; either that or the reinstatement of the Discworld characters article. As to the ther issue, problem is, there is at present no concerted effort to deal with the Discworld. Hasn't ever been really. Pratchetters only really club together when an article (usually, for some reason, Unseen University) is threatened with deletion. Most work is done by anonymous outside contributors. What is needed is a clarion call to gather together a dedicated Pratchett taskforce, similar to that which existed for Harry Potter until recently. Serendipodous 21:00, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A few points to keep in mind:

  • This has been mentioned before, but check your redirects.
  • Style guidelines prohibit capitalisation of all words in a title heading, unless the title is a proper noun. Otherwise, only the first letter of the title is capitalised; i.e. "Ankh-Morporkians by institution" not "Ankh-Morporkians By Institution".
  • Links are never added to section headings.
  • Try to avoid redundancy in heading titles. For instance, since the Discworld itself is fictional, you do not need to add "fictional" to the subject headings.

Serendipodous 21:00, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re, the changes. I disagree. The article isn't describing Chelys galactica generally; it is describing the Great A'Tuin specifically. We cannot draw conclusions on the general habits of Chelys galactica based on a sample of one. For instance, there is no reason to assume that any other member of the species has to cock its leg to allow the Sun to pass. The only other examples of Chelys galactica mentioned in the novels didn't have habitable Discworlds on them, and there is no reason to assume they all would. Re: "in universe"; the article is in-universe, and would remain so even if you added the word "fictional" to every line. The only way to make the article adhere to Wikipedia's defined "out of universe" perspective would be to blank it and start again, this time using biographical sources to describe how Pratchett came up with the Discworld concept, and how the various concepts Pratchett created for the Discworld have been analysed by literary scholars. But I have no interest in doing that. Serendipodous 22:52, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I got as many redirects as I could think of, though I'm not sure what redirects you altered when you changed the article. I don't really want to get into arguments over this, as arguments are tiresome and only serve to drive people away. I think, before we make any future alterations, we should discuss them first. If we are serious about taking this project on, then let's be serious about it.

If I find any changes that I consider contentious, I'll post my thoughts here before I change them back: User:Serendipodous/Discworld. If you want to make any future changes, discuss them there before you make them.

The issue of in-universe is not merely semantic. The only reason this page isn't repeatedly targeted for deletion, like Unseen University is, is because it hasn't occurred to anyone to do it. An out of universe article on the Discworld would include quotes from Pratchett interviews about why he chose to create a flat world; scholarly sources on the mythical origins of the Discworld concept, discussions of how Pratchett arrived at his various locations etc. Without such material, in-universe articles live and die on their notability. And not enough people consider the Discworld notable. Serendipodous 16:11, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discworld characters[edit]

Just going to butt into this conversation here, and voice what I think should have been done concerning Discworld characters. I know WP:DISCWORLD is incredibly inactive and you did note on the talk page, but I still think you should've established a consensus before you did what you did to the Discworld characters articles. Personally, I disagree completed with what you did, and I'd of done pretty much the exact opposite. Rather than moving stuff out of the article, I would've done this:

I was hoping to propose this on a WikiProject I'm proposing, since WikiProject Discworld is beyond dead and all that. Keep in mind that fictional characters from Discworld must have reliable, non-trivial and non-primary sources to be on Wikipedia, which pretty much none of the characters have. Harry Blue5 (talk) 20:18, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that inactivity can happen with articles. I'm still going to go on with what I'm doing, mainly because, really, we need some sources to give articles to characters. Better to have 1 oversized articles than 10 useless ones, IMO. I'm also going to try and trim information on current characters as well. That said, I recall Terry Pratchett saying that people have wrote to him saying they wish that Death is like his version. If we can find more sources like that (indeed any), then Death might be able to get his own article. Harry Blue5 (talk) 16:38, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Where, per chance, are we going to be discussing this? I mean, if there's going to be more than two users, we can't continue it on this and mine talkpage, unless we change the way we speak to just one talkpage. Harry Blue5 (talk) 17:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, can I just point to WP:SILENCE. Just because no one replied, doesn't mean you established a full consensus. It probably would've been better to contact someone after no one replied. Harry Blue5 (talk) 17:53, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I miscommunicated there. What I meant was, yes it was right what you did, though it would probably have been better to contact WP:NOVELS or something. So should I have, really. But yeah, let's not go there. Harry Blue5 (talk) 20:41, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I left a message at the page you mentioned. Harry Blue5 (talk) 13:34, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Mobtown Mongrel. You have new messages at User:Serendipodous/Discworld.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

L-Space's Discworld & Pratchett Wiki[edit]

I know you're a Discworld fan, so I thought you might be interested in the Discworld & Pratchett Wiki. It's great for Discworld stuff and pretty much everything Terry Pratchett-related that for whatever reason can't be shown or properly elaborated on Wikipedia. Harry Blue5 (talk) 20:44, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 February 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:53, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings[edit]

Got your note on an IP-user talk page (User_talk:98.228.48.11) regarding the Discworld cleanup. I'd be glad to help, but won't have much time until July 30th -- I'm finishing law school and getting ready to take the bar exam, which is (ahem) nontrivial. If there are any specific tasks, let me know via my talk page; I'll try to check it on weekends. MJustice (talk) 12:03, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 February 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 18:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 7 March 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 14 March 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 21 March 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 28 March 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 4 April 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 11 April 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 18 April 2011[edit]

Vandalism?[edit]

Hi there MM. I see you are an established editor, so I am puzzled by your edits to Easter Bunny just now where you appear to revert back to some nasty vandalism. What gives, did you get turned around? Jusdafax 00:54, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 2 May 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 9 May 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 16 May 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 23 May 2011[edit]

The Fifth Elephant[edit]

Hi, I re-removed that sentence. Per WP:NOR mainly because it does have to be sourced even if Pratchett did say it somewhere since it isn't part of the main storyline, also because it doesn't fit with the rest of the storyline in terms of placement in that section. If you disagree I'm happy to discuss it on Talk:The Fifth Elephant or on one of our talk pages. Cat-five - talk 19:50, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 May 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 6 June 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 13 June 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 20 June 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 27 June 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 4 July 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 11 July 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 18 July 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 25 July 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 01 August 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 08 August 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 15 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:11, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:02, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 August 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 08:32, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 September 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 September 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:01, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 September 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:08, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2011[edit]


Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:55, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:35, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 October 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:54, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 October 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 October 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:59, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 October 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 17:43, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 November2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:47, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 November 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:54, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 November 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:17, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 November 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 05 December 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 12 December 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 19 December 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 26 December 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 02 January 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 09 January 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 16 January 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 23 January 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 30 January 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 06 February 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 13 February 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 20 February 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 27 February 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 05 March 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 12 March 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 19 March 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 26 March 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 02 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 09 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 16 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 23 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 30 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 07 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 14 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 21 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 28 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 04 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 11 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 18 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 25 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 02 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 09 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 16 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 23 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 30 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 06 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 13 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 20 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 27 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 03 September 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 10 September 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 17 September 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 24 September 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 01 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 08 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 15 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 22 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 29 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 05 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 12 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 19 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 26 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 03 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 10 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 17 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 24 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 31 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 07 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 14 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 21 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 28 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 04 February 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 11 February 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 18 February 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 25 February 2013[edit]

WikiCup 2013 February newsletter[edit]

Round 1 is now over. The top 64 scorers have progressed to round 2, where they have been randomly split into eight pools of eight. At the end of April, the top two from each pool, as well as the 16 highest scorers from those remaining, will progress to round 3. Commiserations to those eliminated; if you're interested in still being involved in the WikiCup, able and willing reviewers will always be needed, and if you're interested in getting involved with other collaborative projects, take a look at the WikiWomen's Month discussed below.

Round 1 saw 21 competitors with over 100 points, which is fantastic; that suggests that this year's competition is going to be highly competative. Our lower scores indicate this, too: A score of 19 was required to reach round 2, which was significantly higher than the 11 points required in 2012 and 8 points required in 2011. The score needed to reach round 3 will be higher, and may depend on pool groupings. In 2011, 41 points secured a round 3 place, while in 2012, 65 was needed. Our top three scorers in round 1 were:

  1. Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), primarily for an array of warship GAs.
  2. London Miyagawa (submissions), primarily for an array of did you knows and good articles, some of which were awarded bonus points.
  3. New South Wales Casliber (submissions), due in no small part to Canis Minor, a featured article awarded a total of 340 points. A joint submission with Alaska Keilana (submissions), this is the highest scoring single article yet submitted in this year's competition.

Other contributors of note include:

Featured topics have still played no part in this year's competition, but once again, a curious contribution has been offered by British Empire The C of E (submissions): did you know that there is a Shit Brook in Shropshire? With April Fools' Day during the next round, there will probably be a good chance of more unusual articles...

March sees the WikiWomen's History Month, a series of collaborative efforts to aid the women's history WikiProject to coincide with Women's History Month and International Women's Day. A number of WikiCup participants have already started to take part. The project has a to-do list of articles needing work on the topic of women's history. Those interested in helping out with the project can find articles in need of attention there, or, alternatively, add articles to the list. Those interested in collaborating on articles on women's history are also welcome to use the WikiCup talk page to find others willing to lend a helping hand. Another collaboration currently running is an an effort from WikiCup participants to coordinate a number of Easter-themed did you know articles. Contributions are welcome!

A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 01:15, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 11 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 18 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 25 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 01 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 08 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 15 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 22 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 29 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 06 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 13 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 20 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 27 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 05 June 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 12 June 2013[edit]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
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) 14:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mobtown_Mongrel&oldid=1168305146"