“Because he's the hero Bill's talk page deserves, but not the one it needs right now. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector. A dark knight.”
File:Pen_Finger_Boiler.jpg
Hello. I have recently come into ownership of a larger, more clearly visible hand boiler than the one in your image on that page, specifically this model. I am intending to take CC-licensed photos and videos of its operation for use in the article. I wanted to ask your opinion on if you think such an image would be appropriate to replace your image in the infobox of the article - I think, since the model in question has a larger and more clearly visible amount of liquid, it will better illustrate the article in question.
Sorry for the overly formal wording, I wasn't really sure how to phrase this. casualdejekyll 02:12, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- A better picture would be ideal. Please go ahead! --Wtshymanski (talk) 04:00, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
The "Clacks" as an appropriate Popular Culture reference for Optical Telegraph
Hi!
You recently reverted my addition [A] of "The Clacks" to the "popular culture" section of Optical Telegraph Optical_telegraph#In_popular_culture with the comment " not alist of every time we see o.t. in movies or tv Undid revision 1129972240"
I wholeheartedly agree that we should not list "every time we see o.t. in movies or tv.".
However, "The Clacks" is a significant example of the Optical Telegraph in popular culture that meets the Wikipedia standards spelled out in Wikipedia:"In_popular_culture"_content#Good_and_bad_popular_culture_references
I'm requesting your guidance in crafting an appropriate mention of the Clacks.
The Wikipedia:"In_popular_culture"_content#Good_and_bad_popular_culture_references guideline recommends that the element should meet at least one of the four criteria listed[B], and that anything that meets three is probably solid.
The Clacks meets three of the required four criteria, so I believe the Clacks should be mentioned in Optical_telegraph#In_popular_culture. The three criteria it meets are:
- Multiple reliable sources: I provided multiple reliable sources, most notably reference [104] that specifically cited the "Clacks" as fiction keeping the concept of the optical telegraph alive.
- A real-world event occured because of the cultural element covered by the reference: After Terry Pratchett's death, programmers created the XClacksOverhead http header as a tribute to him, as I mentioned in my entry.
- The referencing material significantly depended on the specific subject?: The central conflict in the "Going Postal" book and movie was to keep the Post Office in business despite the competition from the Clacks.
I was trying to make it clear that "The Clacks" was not a minor reference by mentioning multiple citations in popular culture, but as you say, this is "not alist of every time we see o.t.", so perhaps I could skinny it down, removing the explicit board game reference in the text, I wanted to include a mention of XClacksOverhead in the main text, since "real-world events" are a criteria called out by the guidelines.
How about something like this?
"In the 21st century, the optical telegraph concept is mainly kept alive in popular culture through fiction[104] such as the "Clacks" shutter-based optical telegraph[105][106][107][108][109] of Terry Pratchett's 2004 Discworld novel Going_Postal[110], 2010 TV film Terry_Pratchett's_Going_Postal[111] and the XClacksOverhead[112][113] http header postmortem tribute to Terry Pratchett."
What are your thoughts?
Macchess (talk) 06:11, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
[A] In the 21st century, the optical telegraph concept is mainly kept alive in popular culture through fiction[104] such as the "Clacks" shutter-based optical telegraph[105] of Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels, most notably in his 2004 novel Going_Postal[106]. Going Postal was made into the 2010 TV film Terry Pratchett's Going Postal. The Discworld "Clacks" were further popularized by a board game[107][108][109] and the internet-based http header tribute to Terry Pratchett, XClacksOverhead[110][111].
[B] When trying to decide if a pop culture reference is appropriate to an article, ask yourself the following:
- Has the subject (if a person or organization) acknowledged the existence of the reference?
- Have multiple reliable sources pointed out the reference?
- Did any real-world event occur because of the cultural element covered by the reference?
- Did the referencing material significantly depend on the specific subject? For example, if the reference is to a specific model of car, did the material use that model car for some reason, or was it just a case of "use a well-known name of a car"?
If you cannot answer "yes" to at least one of these, you are probably just adding trivia. Get three or more, and you are probably adding genuinely encyclopedic content.