User talk:Larry Hockett

User

Talk

Contribs

Promoted

Gallery

Information on extensively reported news by highly regarded league reporters

Hey there, I see you've been editing for a very long time and totally appreciate how much effort you must have spent over the years to achieve such high edit totals. I am a big sports fans, specifically the NBA, and I become very active on Wiki especially during the offseason to keep league info up to date while the active offseason unfolds in terms of roster changes and team updates. I have had many discussion with Wiki editors in the past of just when the right time to edit a page is after big news breaks. Without going into extensive detail, I feel as though with how fast news travels these days and with the impeccable reputations of some widely respected league reporters, namely Adrian Wojnarowski and Shams Charania, I feel as though it would truly be beneficial to NBA related pages to accept edits when news is broken this way. Frankly, it gets confusing for people who are less knowledgeable about some of Wiki's policies (in terms of when an edit should be made of "reported" news) which begins the counterproductive edit wars by two groups who both believe they are doing the right thing. Anyways, I just wanted to reach out to get your view on this subject. I'm no expert, but I do love staying on top of changes and keeping everything up to date for more casual followers of the league that rely on wiki for quick info, especially during busy off seasons. Feel free to read my proposal from two years ago that I hopefully linked correctly here. I also posted it to the NBA WikiProject page where it received a lot of attention, but mostly reiterating the same point to wait "official team announcement" which after reading my reasons, you can obviously tell I see as very counterproductive. I'm not wiki savvy enough to request an actual policy change, but I'd love to get your input after reading some of my thoughts. Thanks in advance! Hope to hear from you. RichieConant34 (talk) 22:43, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, these situations are frustrating for me and I usually don't get involved unless the team changes are clearly spurious or the editor has a history of doing the same thing in the past. I feel like Template:Current sports transaction might be underutilized here. Instead of just vaguely mentioning the fact that the subject is in the news for a recent sports transaction, I sometimes wonder if it could say "The subject of this article is currently in the news regarding a reported trade from the (Team A) to the (Team B). The team name should not be changed in the article until there is an announcement from the team itself." When I look at an article with the current version of the template, I can't tell whether the team in the lead is the old team or the reported new team.

I don't know if it's realistic to expect editors to distinguish between individual reporters. The custom on WP is to evaluate the source but not necessarily the writer. A certain newspaper is either notable or not, regardless of which columnist wrote a specific article. Hope this helps. Larry Hockett (Talk) 23:10, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

@Larry Hockett: All good points. I agree that Template:Current sports transaction would definitely be more useful if specific teams were mentioned to clear up a lot of the confusion that is tied to off-season player movement. My issue with the whole system is that the pages are continuously changed during this lull of time between "unsourced" or "anonymous" sources and official team announcement which may come days later, regardless of the template note or semi protection. Whether it's excited editors who believe the top reporters of the league themselves are extremely reliable and acceptable sources, to which I somewhat agree with, or its more experienced editors who refer to a possibly outdated policy for these unique scenarios. Either way, the constant edit wars that take place allows for optimal confusion and frustration among all contributors as well as non editors just visiting player pages during this time. RichieConant34 (talk) 15:10, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

sorry

I deadly understand that I'm vexing here. I'm always decide to run out forever but it is inside mine and that would force me to stick. I just need to tell the world that I'm sorry and that include you! Lirress (talk) 18:47, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

There is no need to apologize. I don't find you to be vexing. Larry Hockett (Talk) 18:54, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive - July 2021

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Margaret McFarland

Absolutely excellent work on Margaret McFarland. I was very pleased to pass it to GA. Thank you so much for taking the care and effort on that article you have! If you ever decided to go for FA status, I may be able to help with getting some info about her in Australia (right now most of Australia is locked down unfortunately). - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 05:41, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your words. I appreciate your suggestions on the talk page. I found the Maxwell King biography of Rogers on Google Books. It has a great chapter on McFarland (how she came to work with Spock, a long childhood illness, etc), but the Google Books version doesn't have page numbers, so I'll have to see if I can get my hands on a physical copy. I will take a look at the Tittnich article. I don't know if I was take this to FAC, but I certainly appreciate the offer of assistance. Thanks again. Larry Hockett (Talk) 06:23, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Haha, can't blame you if you don't - I'm here for a good time, not a long time in terms of writing individual articles, so GA is all the time and effort I can give myself :-) Aussie Article Writer (talk) 07:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Aubrey Huff Good Article Reassessment

Aubrey Huff, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --Whiteguru (talk) 01:28, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Terri Schavo and NPOV

We could rip out every mention of Terri, Michael and euthanasia from that article because that is not what the bulk of the text deals with. It deals with bad lawmaking. I am not being POV in calling enacting unconstitutional laws "bad". Any child can recognize that such a waste of time and money is not good. We have to call the article something like "Terri Schavo" because that is what it is best known as, but it is not really a biography at all. Just skim the text and you will see. My modest contributions are NPOV. I am providing context. I never mention a political party. I never dictate whether faith or rationality is superior. I never even state a preference about becoming a caveman or not. I let the reader choose their fate. Please let use not revert war. Please do just switch to yet another easy excuse like WP:OR and then another and another. I invite you to do some creative work and help make this article a featured article. That is our common goal, is it not?--Pages777 (talk) 13:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

It's not my goal to take that entry to FAC. I was just warning you about a clear issue with non-neutral wording. Larry Hockett (Talk) 13:51, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I am working on a complete re-write of that lead section with all of its very unimportant detail. That unimportant detail is there because the manipulative editors with a right-to-life agenda force attention on those details long ago. They manipulated Wikipedia content for all these years and now I insist that it is time to improve the article quality with a complete rewrite of the lead. Please see User:Pages777/ts. Please feel free to contribute to that draft. I will put it in the article in two days. For the body of the article, I guess we and just drone on and on about fact after fact, but WP:LEAD is unambiguous: what matters there is IMPORTANCE. Figuring that out requires something more than just some silly notion of tone. It requires critical thought, judgement, analysis, insight, wisdom a talented human mind and what people go to law school and journalism school for beyond just making money. You know, that kind of thing that the elderly Robert McHenry still attempts to accomplish. The talent, the effort and the work, work, work is on deciding what goes into the first paragraph of the news article or legal brief or encyclopedia article in what facts you choose to focus on. What is important in this legal case is who has civic merit in the great American tradition of the founding forefathers and who does not. In terms of importance, there is no need to mention the Bush brothers or the Supreme Court or the irrational therapy in the 1990's. That is all just those vile right-to-lifers trying to suggest that they are righteous and important and the Terri would someday fully recover. The right-to-lifers Bushes were and still are under the law and therefor they are much, much less important the law. I am an editor with an agenda and I am going to manipulate the Wikipedia content in order impose my agenda on it. My agenda is rationality. The kind of crap that the founding fathers and the U.S. Constitution and really, really evil destructive crap like that it all about. You have your chance now to provide input and for us to collaborate. You do not have permission from me to revert that edit when I replace the lead of the article the with what we are now working on together. Two days.--Pages777 (talk) 19:55, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

I think I may have given you the wrong impression. I'm not looking to collaborate on this entry (at least not to any greater extent than I would with any other random article that pops up on my watchlist). The situation is just that I see edits to the article on my watchlist, and like I do for any other entry on the list, I take care of easy situations like vandalism or other unconstructive edits. I believe the caveman thing is what attracted my attention in the first place. We shouldn't even see that word in any entry not specifically discussing actual cavemen (there could be an exception for direct quotes). For an unconstructive edit like that, no permission is required to revert. It also wouldn't matter if you offered to collaborate first, if you posted the unconstructive edit to your sandbox first, or if a certain amount of time had passed; it would still get reverted and a warning would be issued on your talk page. Larry Hockett (Talk) 21:00, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Uh, I achieved a sense of accomplishment in the pursuit of quality and I jumped the gun. I just put my version of the lead in. In that earlier version, that sat there year after sickening year, Michael's name occurs only once in the lead, but now it occurs eight times. That previous situation was because of the right to lifers. It is called damnatio memoriae. If the heretic is alive, you burn him at the stake, and otherwise, you find every book, every letter and dig up their body and burn it all and take a sledge hammer to the gravestone. The goal is to annihilate every last iota of evidence that the person ever lives, breathed or ever uttered a single word. That is those Jesus-loving right to lifers for you. The Roman Catholic propagation of the faith and all that jazz.--Pages777 (talk) 22:03, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Larry Hockett:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 500 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

Robinson projection

Hello. I recently made an addition to the Robinson projection Wikipedia page stating that it's the most common projection for maps. The link below is the closest thing I have to a source. Look at any Wikipedia article with an applicable map and compare it to the one in the link. If you go down to the bottom of the linked article, there's a category called "SVG maps with Robinson projection". Regrettably the list is not complete, but as you can see, it's pretty common. I hope this will be satisfactory as a source per se.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BlankMap-World-Microstates.svg

I don't think I've been involved in editing that entry recently. It sounds like omitting this information was the correct decision though. Larry Hockett (Talk) 13:21, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Using full name in the born section

On BLPs, Is it good to use full names in the early life section? Ethan2345678 (talk) 07:06, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

The Born parameter in the infobox usually doesn't have a name in it unless the subject's birth name is different from their common name. Larry Hockett (Talk) 07:14, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I mean in the early life section Ethan2345678 (talk) 08:43, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ramsey Dardar

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ramsey Dardar you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 22:41, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Proposed Women in Green Editathon

Hello Larry -- With the goal of helping to progress the WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) women’s rights-themed GA nomination goal for 2021, I’m proposing that WiG hold a special editathon event in the fall (maybe October/November?). I can assist with logistics, but I need to know how much interest/support there might be from WiG participants first. Please let me know what you think in the talk page conversation! All the best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 02:07, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ramsey Dardar

The article Ramsey Dardar you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Ramsey Dardar for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 01:20, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Raymond Riles

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Raymond Riles you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 02:01, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Raymond Riles

The article Raymond Riles you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Raymond Riles for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:21, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Raymond Riles

The article Raymond Riles you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Raymond Riles for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 18:01, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ramsey Dardar

The article Ramsey Dardar you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ramsey Dardar for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 02:01, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Margaret McFarland

The Women in Green wikiproject would like to add Margaret McFarland to the listed GA articles here. Would you be alright with this? - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 10:21, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Aussie Article Writer, that would be great. Thanks for asking me. Larry Hockett (Talk) 10:48, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

No probs, thanks! - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 11:56, 24 July 2021 (UTC)