Red-tailed hawk

Draft

I have wikified Draft:E. Michael Jones quite a bit. Do you think, it is ready for entering mainspace? Would appreciate any input. Biohistorian15 (talk) 01:50, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

No, I do not think it is ready, for both the reasons I have listed above when replying to Liz, and also that nuking sections on certain published works altogether rather than completing them is exactly the opposite of what the drafting stage is for. There is no rush to get this published and, since this is a biography of a living person, we should take our time to get the article to a better state before moving it to mainspace. — Red-tailed sock _{(Red-tailed hawk's nest)} 11:59, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

I also don’t love the copying the structure/phrasing from <encyclopedia.pub>, which itself is copied from handwiki (and may be from a deleted version of this page). — Red-tailed sock _{(Red-tailed hawk's nest)} 12:01, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Well, if you're planning on having a section on basically each of his major books, I don't see how this would be workable. I think we/you should focus on a solid and accurate (yet interesting) summary in one or a few (sub-)section(s) of "Views" or "Work"...

If you look at other articles like this one (e.g. in my "See also" addition), they are absolutely impossible to maintain with so many moving parts. There is a cheap and easy case to be made (over and over again) that these wouldn't be notable enough/are "WP:PROFRINGE" in such detail. I think you might be making it harder for yourself than it has to be. Biohistorian15 (talk) 12:07, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it would be impossible to maintain once it is initially written. One has to be careful to write the sections in line with the neutral point of view policy and the fringe theories guideline, but I do think that the drafting stage is exactly that sort of time.

I agree that there are sources that more or less point to The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit as a turning point in Jones's focus, but there achieving parity of sources regarding the book itself takes time. There is, of course, the (infamous) review from Gilbert, portions of the ADL profile/extremism glossary, and various other mentions. I suspect that there's enough here to get something written on them and expand the article before publication in mainspace. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I'll leave the draft up to you then. You might still want to restore my "See also", the infobox expansion etc. though. Biohistorian15 (talk) 07:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

That's fair. A see also of some sort and restoring the number of kids to lead makes sense. My apologies for the mobile edit being so blunt. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 September 2024

• News and notes: WikiCup enters final round, MCDC wraps up activities, 17-year-old hoax article unmasked

• In the media: AI is not playing games anymore. Is Wikipedia ready?

• Recent research: Simulated Wikipedia seen as less credible than ChatGPT and Alexa in experiment

• News from the WMF: Meet the 12 candidates running in the WMF Board of Trustees election

• Wikimania: A month after Wikimania 2024

• Serendipity: What it's like to be Wikimedian of the Year

• Traffic report: After the gold rush

• Humour: Local man halfway through rude reply no longer able to recall why he hates other editor

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

RM comments

Have you seen the RM comments I brought up at AN here? I'd like to hear what you think or thought of those with respect to whether or not you are involved in PIA. RAN1 (talk) 17:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm certainly WP:INVOLVED with respect to those requested move discussions. And, as I was a direct participant in the discussion about the page title, I would certainly not close any RMs on that page (or ones that are obviously related in substance, like Timeline of the Israel–Hamas war) going forward. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Both you and Levivich were involved in those RMs, which were about how the war should be named. Levivich's reports concerned conduct in the discussions about how articles should describe other aspects of the Arab–Israeli conflict, broadly construed. Why should those disputes be treated separately? RAN1 (talk) 00:51, 11 September 2024 (UTC)