Talk:Searchlight, Nevada

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nevada, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.NevadaWikipedia:WikiProject NevadaTemplate:WikiProject NevadaNevada articles

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

What's the authority for calling Searchlight a "ghost town"? I've never heard anybody refer to it that way myself, and it has very few abandoned buildings, certainly fewer than Las Vegas... :-) Stan 21:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed it until someone cites their statement. GUllman 21:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edith Head

Why is Edith Head mentioned in the article? Nothing in the WP article about her mentions Searchlight. --papageno (talk) 00:01, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Referenced it and correct edith head article. Americasroof (talk) 18:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Popular References

There is something that heavily concerns me, particularly if the administrators are even literate or open minded, or just are adhering to the rules too heavily and are interpreting too literally the rules. Here's the thing: I was linked from another wiki to this one regarding Searchlight, but then I noticed in the popular usage section how the information was wrong regarding the fictional accident in the game Fallout, New Vegas. It had no sources, unfortunately, and that's where I should have added that, and instead just corrected the information. But here's what angered me: one administrator by the name of Magnolia677 decided it was funny to delete the information altogether (I think I'm overthinking this action, but that's not the point). After I saw no reason why that should have been deleted, I decided to participate in his or mine childish edit war, using the lack of sources as an excuse to threaten me to ban me from the site, and I had a hard time defending myself considering the attention he was bringing. And now everyone is against me for not citing a source for an article already uncited.

That was besides the point. The real point is that now I have another troll (again, I'm speculating), this time saying the same information I added is irrelevant and should be deleted (his name is User:John from Idegon, John from Idegon. If that information is irrelevant to the cultural or societal impact the town has had in popular media, then shouldn't the information about Scott Joplin be removed too, considering that is about the same as adding the reference to the game Fallout: New Vegas? If so, why even have a popular media section? The game is also referenced in the articles Goodsprings, Nevada, Nipton, California, Primm, Nevada, and many others in the Mojave Desert. This game recognizes all of these locations in the Mojave Desert and making them known, and the administrator is labeling it an irrelevant zombie game.Dandtiks69 (talk) 19:55, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I call it lack of cooperation, unproductive by all means, but that is a separate subject for the administrators' page.Dandtiks69 (talk) 19:56, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Calling other users trolls is certainly non productive. Have fun at the noticeboard. John from Idegon (talk) 22:36, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fine, John from Idegon, I take that back, I'm sorry, but it seems right now that you are purposefully missing the point in order to anger me. Isn't that what a troll is? Just put down the legitimate reasons why you will agree or disagree with what I put a paragraph's effort in like a real academic and I'll try to comply. What's so hard about that?

Being a troll has absolutely nothing to do with your threshold of anger. Three separate editors have reverted your addition of this crap. No one else is here supporting its addition. That's all the explanation you need. Contested edits need consensus to be put back in the article. You don't have consensus. That's all you need. Bye. John from Idegon (talk) 08:12, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia, not a gaming blog. Wikipedia has little place for what's referred to as "gamecruft". It has even less tolerance for editors who name call and are not willing to work with others. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:17, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again, sorry John from Idegon and Magnolia677, but I was actually trying to cooperate. Please forgive my name-calling. And just so both of you know, the information I added you two are opposed to was already there; all I did was modify the information to tell the truth better about what happened in the game. Also, considering many articles on many videogames are here on Wikipedia, a serious site, they should be deleted, but of course I need consensus.Dandtiks69 (talk) 23:20, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Popular References

The references section contains only one reference, and it is irrelevant to the article here on geography. I instead copied it to the actual song article. I request that the musical reference on this page gets removed along with the whole "Popular References" header. It does not seem academic to mix these two very different schools together.

Thank you.

FDJK001 (talk) 22:37, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And it is back :) I'm no fan of "pop culture" sections that are full of trivial mentions or promotional blurbs. This Scott Joplin "story" is a bit different - almost relevant... Seems to me the content should be reworded and moved to the history section as it is of historical interest. Vsmith (talk) 00:58, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I don't see it. I agree that any "trivia" on popular cultural references are great but because here in Wikipedia we follow laws by letter and not by spirit I say we remove the whole section altogether.

Maybe it should be moved to the historical section. I already moved it to his page. That would be better.

FDJK001 (talk) 01:21, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FDJK001, please stop reverting and changing until a consensus is formed. I've restored the article to the last version prior to today. Although I agree with Vsmith that pop culture sections such as this are seldom useful, they are endorsed in the WP:USCITY guideline. This situation is IMO why. We have a notable song from a highly notable composer that is directly inspired by this community. It is not, however, directly related to the town's history. It's more akin to a source for history, but you'd have to be inside Joplin's head to interpret it. So I am in favor of the status quo. I'll search for better sources next time I'm at a computer. John from Idegon (talk) 02:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't removed anything, just moved: I moved it to the historical section of the article, like Vsmith said is optimal. If there's no other rationale I'll move it automatically (in a few days, of course). Besides, history is literally a lot of interpretations from other people's heads. Take the Conquistadores, for example, they said all was peaceful until missionaries exposed them, or something like that.

FDJK001 (talk) 02:10, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fallout: New Vegas

Hi all. I added Searchlight as being one of the towns featured in this game. I didn't feel including a lot of in-game details was necessary. I added this entry before I noticed the edit war going on. I hope my entry is basic enough to remain. Gorba (talk) 19:31, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Gorba. I did revert your addition. As you noticed, inclusion of this copy here is contentious and you going to need a much higher quality source if you want to add this. Your addition was a big improvement over the previous. With a better source, I could live with it. John from Idegon (talk) 21:10, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Gorba (talk) 00:45, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Searchlight might be relevant to be mentioned in the article on the game (with supporting reference(s)). However; to mention the factoid about the game in the article about the town - you would need a WP:reliable source showing that the game had an impact on the town and not just a trivial mention. Vsmith (talk) 01:27, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fair question to ask Vsmith. I added this information to the section because it is called "In popular culture". Perhaps I'm wrong but my brain interprets "In popular culture" to literally mean where has the subject of this article appeared in popular culture. Video games, and the Fallout series, are very popular among the video game community - a community that according to an industry report by Spil Games is "more than 1.2 billion... worldwide" (http://venturebeat.com/2013/11/25/more-than-1-2-billion-people-are-playing-games/) - that's almost a quarter of the earth's population. There appears to be no indication from what I've seen that "In popular culture" implies "an impact on the town". Quite honestly I never heard of Searchlight Rag; a catchy tune after listening to it I must say. I'm also positive most people my age and less have never heard of this song. But if you asked "Have you heard about Fallout: New Vegas?" They would likely reply, "Yeah. That's a video game based in Las Vegas with casinos." To which you could add, "The small mining town of Searchlight is one of the featured towns." That is basically what I did. Anyhow, I do appreciate the additional information you provided. Gorba (talk) 15:08, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]