User talk:Meg Taylor: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Meg Taylor
No edit summary
imported>Meg Taylor
(Blanked the page)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Question ==


I think what you do is very helpful.  However, I cannot see why, under [[Mervyn Peake]], you have removed the entire list of works. Is there some technical reason?  --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 18:09, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
:The list was moved to /Bibliography but I've moved that to /Works. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 19:40, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
::Hello Martin, yes I filed it under Bibliography but Works would have been better. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 23:48, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
== Regarding [[Matter (disambiguation)]] ==
Meg: If we want a reader to reach [[Matter (chemistry)]], which is written from a chemist's perspective, instead of the article [[Matter]], which is written from a physicist's perspective, or to have a choice of either or both, the disambiguation page, [[Matter (disambiguation)]], cannot suffice, as [[Matter]] does not redirect to [[Matter (disambiguation)]]. So, if a reader types the word, Matter, in the Go-to-page search box, he or she will reach the article [[Matter]] written from a physicist's perspective, and not have a choice between that article and the article, [[Matter (chemistry)]].
I do not personally know how to solve that problem. Do you have any ideas? I might choose to change the title of the article, [[Matter]], to something like, [[Matter (fundamentals)]], Then create a redirect article, [[Matter]], That redirects to [[Matter (disambiguation)]]. Perhaps you have a simpler solution. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 20:54, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
:Or rename [[Matter]] to [[Matter (physics)]] and redirect as normal to the disambiguation page.  [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 21:28, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
::I think Russell's idea is the best solution. Move Matter to Matter (physics). [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 21:42, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
== Double to single quotation marks ==
Hi, Meg, just curious to know why you're doing this. Not that it bothers me, as ' doesn't need the shift key, while " does - perhaps that's the reason? [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 14:11, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
:The Oxford encyclopaedias and compendiums of music I have, use single quotes for all song titles. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 23:40, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
== Out-of-copyright credits ==
You may find [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Popular_songs_based_on_classical_works this] useful. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 17:55, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
:Hi Peter, I add the credits as they appear on the sleeve, and on the actual records themselves. Martini's name does not appear on the release. While it maybe true it's based on Martini's 'Plaisir d'amour', the question remains for us an encyclopaedists, do we historically revise credits or do we remain faithful to the original publication? I tend to fall into the latter category. Here are the ASCAP credits [https://mobile.ascap.com/aceclient/AceClient/#ace/search/workID/330122219] which make no mention of Martini. And here is the original single release [http://www.45cat.com/imageview/11FFDA389E639DFCC50]. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 23:40, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
::Surely the job of an encyclopaedia is to give a fair picture of the "truth". Record credits for "lifted" tunes usually only mention the original composer if they're still in copyright. We should add that information when it's available. I suspect the list I linked is far from complete. By all means devise some way to indicate that the information isn't given in the original record credits. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 10:03, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
:::I think it is important to hold on to the idea that truth is an accurate representation of reality, however the use of wikipedia as a reliable source over an entity like ASCAP is rather troubling. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 02:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
== wouldn't it be cool to have a lyrics tab on albums? ==
Just a thought. [[User:Tom Kelly|Tom Kelly]] 19:35, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
:The main problem with lyrics and tab is the issue of copyright clearance and licence fees. There have been numerous lyrics websites shut down in the past by music publishers. The National Music Publishers Association is responsible for sending "take down" notices to unlicensed sites, eg. [http://variety.com/2013/biz/news/music-publishers-crack-down-on-sites-featuring-song-lyrics-1200819351/]. The only lyrics that can be published without permission are those in the public domain. Many of the lyrics by the Beatles, Elvis etc are still owned by music publishers, and are not free to use. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 22:26, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
== Odysseus ==
Thanks for your improvements on Odysseus.  I notice that you have changed "ass" to "horse".  [[Robert Graves]]'s translation of Hyginus gives "ass" (donkey), which is what I was going by.  I only trespassed on this subject because it was one of those listed in John Stephenson's list of Wanted Articles, and I did know the odd bit about it.  Incidentally your User page says that this author is no longer active in CZ, which is manifestly incorrect.  --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 19:09, 25 April 2014 (UTC)  P S It occurs to me, belatedly as usual, that an ox and a plough horse might be considered reasonably well matched, whereas an ox and a donkey would add to the ludicrous effect.  --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 19:24, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
:Hi Martin. The translated text I used says 'horse'. Grant, Mary (ed.) (1960) ''The Myths of Hyginus, translated and edited by Mary Grant'', Lawrence: University of Kansas Press. University of Kansas Publications in Humanistic Studies, no. 34. and ''Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities'' (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0062:entry=odysseus-harpers) Also there is this famous artwork by George M. Ottinger, 'Ulysses Ploughing the Sea Shore' (http://hccl.byu.edu/macfarlane/OGCMA/0729NOTOdysseus_Ottinger.htm)
::If you can supply a referemce I can look up the original Latin some time. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 12:18, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
:::http://latin.packhum.org/loc/1263/1/0#42
:::VLIXES. 95.1.1
:::''Agamemnon et Menelaus Atrei filii cum ad Troiam oppugnandam''
:::''coniuratos duces ducerent, in insulam Ithacam ad Vlixem''
:::''Laertis filium uenerunt, cui erat responsum, si ad Troiam isset,''
:::''post uicesimum annum solum sociis perditis egentem domum rediturum.''
:::''itaque cum sciret ad se oratores uenturos, insaniam''
:::''simulans pileum sumpsit et equum cum boue iunxit ad aratrum.''
:::''quem Palamedes ut uidit, sensit simulare atque Telemachum filium''
:::''eius cunis sublatum aratro ei subiecit et ait, Simulatione deposita''
:::''inter coniuratos ueni. tunc Vlixes fidem dedit se uenturum; ex eo''
:::''Palamedi infestus fuit.''
:::''equum'' is Latin for horse. Donkey/ass should be ''asinus'' but I don't see it in the text. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 13:34, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
::::You're quite right. "equum cum boue iunxit" = "yoked a horse with an ox". [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 14:32, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
:::::We'll have to leave it there.  Graves cites other sources for the para in which this occurs, but I don't know for which bits of it.  --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 18:07, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
::::::On the other hand, in terms of philology, one only has to turn to ''The White Goddess'', and see the ongoing debate over Graves' use of words. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 02:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
== You've been nominated as a candidate in the June 2014 election ==
You've been nominated as a candidate in the [[User:ElectionJune2014|June 2014 election]]. Please visit [[User:ElectionJune2014/Nominations|this page]] to accept or decline the position. No action will also be treated as declining. If you accept, you may choose to write a statement - see the election page for further details. Alternatively, contact me via my Talk page or privately via e-mail. Regards, [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 14:53, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
:Thank you, John. I would like to see changes to help improve Citizendium. I have a number of ideas previously discussed in emails since the last election, to put forward before the councils, in that regard. I also stated I would also like to see a debate between candidates prior to the election date to scrutinize their policies, their contributions to the project, and the reasons why they are running as candidates. The next election, whoever runs it, should set aside a page where candidates can debate each other. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 02:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
::Regarding your debate idea, perhaps a moderated debate, where the moderator asks prepared questions, perhaps questions collected from the community. I have not thought this through completely. But I do like the debate idea, implemented in some structured manner. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 22:16, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
:::Hi Anthony, the debate would be be a positive statement of Citizendium's unique goals and approaches. Amongst these include expert validation, civility, structured knowledge navigation, scholastic support for Eduzendium, etc. Firstly, expert synthesis and context-setting are a strength of Citizendium and need to be cherished. Second, we need accepted community governance, fair but not bureaucratic. To be a part of governance, authors and editors need to be active participants. We also need to recognize and encourage this active participation, including allowing demonstrated knowledge to be as important as authenticated credentials. Third, while the Citizendium Charter cannot be an immutable book of rules, and needs to respect the founding Statement of Fundamental Principles, concepts such as neutrality need more clarification, especially with the balance between expert opinion and fringe topics. Editor authority needs better definition, as well as a practical appeals process. Fourth, we may need to make the approval process more flexible, so that it doesn't stall due to lack of editors. We may need grades of approval, and we also need the ability to reduce or withdraw approval upon review. The principles of workgroups need to be reexamined based on experience, especially with nebulous topics that don't neatly fit defined workgroups. We also need a structure that encourages productive alliances with other knowledge-curating organizations. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 00:49, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
::::On neutrality policy, you might like to look at [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,1104.msg8598.html#msg8598], which seems to be suggesting that different academic disciplines have somewhat different conceptions of neutrality. If that's so, our current one-size-fits-all policy, presumably the philosophers' one, may not be appropriate. But, if you have different ones, you might get problems when an article belongs to more than one workgroup. We might then want more than one article on a topic, approaching it from the points of view of different disciplines, with presumably the main article simply directing the reader there. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 10:49, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
:::::Thanks Peter. A look back at an interesting time when contributors were very passionate about the subject. There was an attempt to bring this topic to the table during the charter drafting period however it only got as far as a passing mention in Article 19. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 00:26, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:45, 27 June 2014

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Meg_Taylor&oldid=783236"