Jump to content

Talk:Wild Center

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

There is no need for two separate articles; the museum's official name is Natural History Museum of the Adirondacks, while the 'Wild Center' thing is simply an ad campaign thing. Duke53 | Talk 16:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts

[edit]

There is one (single purpose account, BTW) editor who keeps reverting the info in the article to reflect their own preferences. The official name is as noted: Natural History Museum of the Adirondacks; any other name is not appropriate for this encyclopedia. Duke53 | Talk 00:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like an odd argument. The name of the museum is quite clearly The Wild Center. Having another name on some arcane legal filing hardly changes that. A legendary baseball star having a driver's license that said George Herman Ruth doesn't change the fact that his real name was Babe Ruth, and that is what his wikipedia shows. A former President having a legal name of William Clinton doesn't change the fact that his real name was Bill, and that is what his wikipedia page shows. This is no different, and for wikipedia to be a realistic and useful encyclopedia, it should show the museum's real name, which is The Wild Center, as reflected in simply everything about the museum, other than some random filing document Duke53 has identified. It's clear from his editing history that he's some sort of bully who wants pages to reflect whatever it is that he believes, but wikipedia should relect reality, not his odd opinions, and it embarrasses the site to reflect the numerous edits he repeatedly makes. 216.112.183.5 (talk)) signed by Duke53 Duke53 | Talk

"Odd argument" ? Perhaps you should take the time to learn how Wikipedia works: items must be verified ! When WP starts using 'odd opinions' from anonymous editors (such as you) over documented facts, then they might as well turn off the lights and call it a day.
The real embarrassment here is that you thought you could waltz in here, spew some foolish analogies (BTW, Babe Ruth's legal name was George Herman Ruth, Bill Clinton' legal name is William Jefferson Clinton) and think your changes would stand. You might consider educating yourself a little bit; then come back and try to improve WP. Cheers. Duke53 | Talk 21:51, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
From actual WP articles:
George Herman Ruth, Jr. (February 6, 1895 – August 16, 1948), best known as "Babe" Ruth and nicknamed "the Bambino" and "the Sultan of Swat"

.

William Jefferson "Bill" Clinton (born William Jefferson Blythe III, August 19, 1946)
See now how the nickname 'thing' works ? Cheers. Duke53 | Talk 21:59, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? Have you seen these pages? Look at their titles. At any rate, I've been looking at this wierd saga, and it just makes no sense. Has anyone been to this museum? Seen what they call themselves? Visited their website? Read their literature? (Spoiler alert - I have). It's more than obvious that "The Wild Center" is not some sort of nickname or other alternate name for marketing purposes. It's its name. Isn't wikipedia supposed to be an encyclopedia? Isn't it supposed to reflect reality? Cut the nonsense - if you want to accurately describe this museum, use it's real name. A site that reflects the personal, incorrect, opinions of a few dictatorial editors is more than a little useless. <---- User:12.237.165.2
Is there any adult supervision going on here? This museum is quite clearly The Wild Center, and it's pretty silly that this page lists it as something else. Why does one person get to create a page that is simply inaccurate?

Naming

[edit]

Because the name of the museum has been the subject of an ongoing dispute between Duke53 (talk · contribs) and 888fortune (talk · contribs), I have put together a summary of which names are used by which sources. alanyst /talk/ 07:22, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From this, I draw the following observations:

  • The official, legal name of the museum is still the original one: Natural History Museum of the Adirondacks.
  • The more popular and colloquial name, and the museum's own choice for how it should be referenced, is The Wild Center.
  • More recent sources seem to favor The Wild Center over Natural History Museum of the Adirondacks, even when they mention both names.

And so my conclusions are:

  • This article's name should remain as-is: Natural History Museum of the Adirondacks.
  • The redirect of The Wild Center to this article is important to keep due to its popularity.
  • Elsewhere in the wiki, it's perfectly fine (and in my opinion, preferable) to refer to the museum as The Wild Center. I prefer it in such cases because it's less clumsy, it's the more commonly used name in recent sources, and it's what the museum calls itself.
  • Calling it one name instead of the other is not an act of vandalism; it is a question of style. If there is a dispute over which name to use in a particular case, get an outside opinion. Or, decide not to make an issue of it.

Hope this helps, alanyst /talk/ 07:22, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TY for giving your 'opinion'.
The reason it's vandalism is simple: the name of this museum is Natural History Museum of the Adirondacks; this person wants to change it. That would be fine if the museum itself had gone through the steps of changing it with New York State' Secretary of State.
No matter how many press releases or interviews given by them, until they legally change the name any attempt to 're-name it' here is vandalism. Period.
This single purpose editor must be like a kindergarden student: "If I ask often enough or say it often enough, they will just give in". That's not how it works here and I'm surprised that you didn't know that.
I can find many, many different 'names' for the lds church online ... how long do you think it would last if I decided to change it in some of the mormon articles here at Wikipedia ?
As always, it is gratifying that you can always be counted on for coming out of your semi-retirement to answer my posts. (Can anybody here say 'Stalker' ?)Your infrequent posts often seem prompted by my activity here. Cheers. Duke53 | Talk 18:38, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's not vandalism to use an alternate name where appropriate. From Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Treatment of alternative names: "There is also no reason why alternative names cannot be used in article text, in contexts where they are more appropriate than the name used as the title of the article." From Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies): "Whenever possible, common usage is preferred (such as The Hartford for The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. and DuPont for the E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company)." That refers to article names, but clearly if the article title doesn't always have to be the full legal name of an organization, then surely the article text doesn't have to quote the full legal name all the time either.
Naturally, the full legal name can be appropriate to use too, so I hope you don't go changing article names around to make a WP:POINT. From Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Considering title changes: "Editing for the sole purpose of changing one controversial title to another is strongly discouraged. If an article title has been stable for a long time, and there is no good reason to change it, it should not be changed."
If you think I'm wrong and it is indeed vandalism to say "The Wild Center" in article text or picture captions, then here's an easy way to see: report 888fortune at WP:AIV and see what response you get. But if you continue to bully 888fortune or anyone else with unwarranted threats and warnings about vandalism, then I will seek admin involvement to settle the matter. alanyst /talk/ 19:23, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"If an article title has been stable for a long time, and there is no good reason to change it, it should not be changed." CASE IN POINT. Do you even read what you write ? You can't pick & choose what articles this applies to; this article has been stable for a long time, except for one vandal continually changing it.
You do what you have to do and I will do what I have to do; what I have to do is stop a single purpose account from making edits that are vandalism. Cheers. Duke53 | Talk 20:40, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You appear to have misapprehended what I'm saying. I'll try using a sequence of twenty short, logically connected statements, numbered for your convenience, to see if that expresses my reasoning more clearly.
  1. The museum's official, legal name is the one you prefer: Natural History Museum of the Adirondacks.
  2. The museum's informal name, preferred by the museum itself and more commonly found in the media, is The Wild Center.
  3. You seem to have a particular distaste for the latter name.
  4. Your personal dislike of the name The Wild Center has nothing to do with how appropriate it is for Wikipedia.
  5. The article has been appropriately named after the legal name, and this has been status quo for a long time.
  6. I quoted Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Considering title changes in support of keeping the article name as-is.
  7. That's the position you favor.
  8. Policy does not prohibit use of the informal name in the article text or elsewhere in the encyclopedia.
  9. Policy in fact supports use of alternative names "in contexts where they are more appropriate."
  10. Use of the name The Wild Center in article text, link labels, picture captions, etc. is therefore one acceptable way of referring to the museum.
  11. "The Wild Center" has certain stylistic advantages in its favor over "Natural History Museum of the Adirondacks" in such situations.
  12. Such advantages include brevity, reflection of common and recent usage, and courteous deference to the institution's own naming preference.
  13. A good-faith editor could reasonably prefer to call the museum The Wild Center, and this would not violate policy.
  14. Thus calling it The Wild Center is not inherently vandalism.
  15. You accused 888fortune of vandalism for these edits: [1] [2] [3] [4]
  16. None of those edits changes the article title against the consensus established in the past.
  17. All of those edits are justifiable uses of the alternate name of the museum.
  18. Thus your reversions and warnings and accusations are unfounded.
  19. Further treatment by you of such edits as vandalism will provide additional evidence of your use of bullying behavior to privilege your own point of view above others'.
  20. Nobody wants Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Duke53 3 to become a blue link. You certainly shouldn't.
Cheers, alanyst /talk/ 03:41, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I misapprehended nothing. Let ME be more clear: this account [User: 888fortune] has made 41 edits in 3+ years[5], 39 of them have to do with the name of the Natural History Museum of the Adirondacks... only one (1) of those edits has even an edit summary ! If that isn't vandalism, then I don't know what else it could be. Their interest isn't in making a good encycolpedia article, it is to promote or sell a marketing program. This single purpose account has proved to have only one thing on their mind. Cheers. Duke53 | Talk 04:25, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Funny, I missed where in WP:Vandalism it mentions those factors. Oh wait, it does mention "Failing to provide an edit summary"...under the heading of "What is not vandalism". If you're going to accuse people of policy violations, you might want to acquaint yourself with what those policies actually say instead of making stuff up. alanyst /talk/ 05:09, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I don't see how you can say 888fortune's interest "isn't in making a good encycolpedia article, it is to promote or sell a marketing program." You can read minds? Is it inconceivable that 888fortune might just be acting on a good-faith desire to improve the encyclopedia by using the more commonly used name for the museum? alanyst /talk/ 05:13, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wild_Center&oldid=1206044036"