“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.
Macchess (talk) 06:11, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mobile phone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bandwidth.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)