User talk:SchroCat
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 1 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
"Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience" Jean Cocteau
 | This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics:
|
New FAC and PR
[edit]To any friendly talk page watchers, I have:
| Article | Process | |
|---|---|---|
 |
St Scholastica Day riot | @FAC |
 |
Berners Street hoax | @FAC |
If there is anyone who fancies commenting, I would be grateful. Cheers - SchroCat (talk)
Examples needed tag on History of Infant Schools page
[edit]Hello. Earlier today, I noticed that you removed an example needed tag after the sentence "There are some examples of institutions similar to infant schools in continental Western Europe dating from the later 18th century." The reference points to the book Infant Schools, their History and Theory, but no page was provided for this ambiguous statement. As such, I placed an example needed tag so that additional context is provided for readers curious about some of these supposed examples. In your edit history removing the tag, you said that "Examples are *not* needed: stating that they exist is enough for an encyclopaedic entry." I am curious if there is a specific policy you are referring to here. Thank you. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 18:05, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- Not everything needs to be based in policy (we have very few of those when it comes to article development). As I mentioned, readers don't need to be given examples of everything, they just need to know that such institutions existed - that's very much the essence of encyclopaedic writing - not bloating and over burdening articles with superfluous details like this is trying to deal with every tiny aspect of a subject like this is a 1,000 page academic work covering every tiny detail. - SchroCat (talk) 18:09, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- Do you think that an additional sentence discussing similar institutions to infant schools would be superfluous? This appears to be a worthwhile addition to the Background section, which discusses the development these institutions in Great Britain. As it currently stands right now, the sentence simply makes a mention of similar institutions in continental Europe without explaining how (or if) these institutions influenced the development of infant schools in Great Britain. Without this clarification, the sentence does not really lead anywhere and only opens up further questions. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 19:15, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- This is something that should be discussed on the article talk page with the person who took it through FAC, but I’ll reiterate that examples would be a superfluous - this is an encyclopaedia entry, not an in-depth 1000 page examination. - SchroCat (talk) 19:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- Do you think that an additional sentence discussing similar institutions to infant schools would be superfluous? This appears to be a worthwhile addition to the Background section, which discusses the development these institutions in Great Britain. As it currently stands right now, the sentence simply makes a mention of similar institutions in continental Europe without explaining how (or if) these institutions influenced the development of infant schools in Great Britain. Without this clarification, the sentence does not really lead anywhere and only opens up further questions. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 19:15, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
Reflections
[edit]You reverted my edit to Debussy, writing "The lead is supposed to reflect the article, not become a collection of quotes and factoids that are not in the article."
But my edit does reflect the article; Debussy's influence on subsequent composers is a theme returned to throughout the article (notably in the section "Influence on later composers", which specifically mentions Boulez.) What "factoids" did I add, other than the self-evident truth that Debussy influenced later composers? The Stephen Hough piece reflects this influence, too.[1] Charlie Faust (talk) 14:28, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
Sources
|
|---|
- The best place to gain consensus for challenged changes is on the article talk page, rather than on this backwater of a talk page. - SchroCat (talk) 14:45, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
Operation mincemeat
[edit]That's gotta be one of the most interesting article that you've worked. I was wondering if Salem witch trials is also your to do list? Hopefully. 2001:4455:389:2700:FD5E:4B6:1A8:A077 (talk) 00:34, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, IP: I’m delighted you enjoyed it. Salem isn’t on my list (I’d not even thought about it, to be honest!) but you never know! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 04:51, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
Jaws
[edit]Shouldn't Jaws be TFA for June 5? Nobody else suggested anything for that date. Its the 50th anniversary. LittleJerry (talk) 02:22, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- June is being scheduled by Wehwalt, so it may be something he can look at. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 04:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- It is being scheduled for June 20, 2025, the 5oth anniversary of the release date. I will probably get to it late today, I'm up to the 13th. Wehwalt (talk) 06:46, 1 May 2025 (UTC)