User talk:Neil zusman/sandbox
I'm at work, so I can't sit down and read it all (will this evening), but skimming through, I do have some suggestions. You may want to make it less about the burning of books and the destruction of libraries and more about the destruction of written cultural documentation. Review MeCASCADIAHowl/Trail 17:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
It includes books and libraries- it includes written cultural documentation. I don't see how this topic will benefit by the hair-split. I think it covers an aspect of several already covered subjects- cultural genocide, book-burning, etc. but is more about destroying history, in all of its manifestations. There is no getting around the burning of libraries as libricide's prime representaiton, it's not just burning books however. I do wish to belabor this point, and I've put in an effort to re-create it on my sandbox.
Neil zusman 21:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
May 8
[edit]Hi Neil, would you like me to give you a hand on this one? Since it is in your userspace, I want to be sure you would like collaboration. Thanks, --Xnuala (talk) 21:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Xnuala,
I have made a copy of the article's code for safe-keeping and am very happy to accept your suggestions. Nice to hear from you. I am stubborn and must be a Wikipedia supporter if I keep trying. The best form of support is the hardest thing to do- critique and edit, but as it seems, this is the human engine running the Wikipedia enterprise.
Neil zusman 12:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- So one thing I've noticed is that in its current state Libricide seems targetted to a scholarly audience. While we have plenty of scholarly readers, Wikipedia is intended for a general audience. For a topic such as Libricide, which as the AFD demonstrated, is not widely understood, I think we need to emphasize the theory rather than the responses to the theory. The section "Symptoms of cultural pathology in figurative language" is very advanced to be the second section of an article on a new topic. I would actually omit both that and "The psychological and moral aspects of libricide" from the Wikipedia article. Perhaps fleshing out the historical and twentieth century sections would not only provide more opportunites to link Libricide to other articles but also increase the appeal to a wider audience. Any thoughts? Would you like me to make my changes to the article in your space, or preview them here for you?--Xnuala (talk) 02:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
For the time being, I'd like to keep the sandbox intact. Can I make another sandbox or is there a place you can preview your changes? You make some good points. I am afraid that watering the article down, which happened before, may cause more mis-understanding. New theories and their relationship to testimony and documentation, I thought, clarified the issue. I am interested in allowing researchers in international law, freedom of speech, the sanctity of culture, multinational and cross-cultural understanding to see the facets of the other issues through instances of libricide in the facets of interpretation selected for this article. Its an international libraries issue. perhaps a clue may be obtained from the preservation issues brought up. Wikipedia, if it doesnt get deleted by a magnetic bomb, or because it might, needs to have a preservation plan. it is a wonderful archive freely available, etc. but has its own preservation issues. destructive tampering, not specifically targeted to articles which may offend some, but the whole site, would be considered libricide too.
click this search i did on on IFLA to see the issue of Sarajevo as they are discussed by this worldwide organization of libraries. http://www.google.com/custom?q=sarajevo&safe=strict&sa=Google+Search&cof=GALT%3A%23CC0000%3BS%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ifla.org%3BVLC%3A%23666633%3BAH%3Aleft%3BBGC%3AWhite%3BLH%3A106%3BLC%3A%23990000%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ifla.org%2Fimages%2Fiflas.gif%3BALC%3A%23666699%3BLW%3A96%3BT%3A%23007B00%3BGIMP%3ARed%3BAWFID%3A4e7b40884c7332ee%3B&domains=ifla.org&sitesearch=ifla.org also, http://www.article19.org/ "our work" http://www.article19.org/work/index.html
i find new things everyday. i know there is a bias here on my part, but as entertaining as wikipedia is for trivia buffs and stoner information heads like me, the fact of its presentation encourages free speech in a way like nothing else on the web. how could we have lived without it? it already feels timeless, but like i said, is as fragile asything else bound by culture.
internet users, many newbies, in oppressed and dictatorial societies probably log onto wikipedia in the secret basements they use sooner than they log onto cnn or bbc. that's partly why i am being so stubborn. My father lost all his relatives in WWII Poland. I have a chip on my shoulder about going after dictators, and have all my life. that's why wikipedia turns me on. i could write essays on a blog, maybe i will, but the opportunity to enter these concerns in a factual article useful for readers who wish to understand the global and historical scope of culture's need to be preserved motivates me to produce a wikipedia article.
i appreciate your interest and would like to think this through. i could be wrong here, but i am passionately convinced that book-burning and cultural genocide alone dont shine enough light in a medium where pro-active participation in our global world is possible.
Neil zusman 13:11, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- Not a problem Neil! I've also got a sandbox, so any changes that I'd like to make I can do there. If you want to visit it is at User:Xnuala/sandbox. It's empty at the moment though. --Xnuala (talk) 22:03, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Opening Recommendation
[edit]Neil, I have a recommendation for your opening:
Libricide, or the act of destruction of books and other written literary matter, is a term with limited use, although gaining prevalence. Although Book Burning is technically an act of Libricide, the reasons differ from other cases of Libricide. Libricide can refer to destruction of a body of material specific to a particular culture as an act of suppression or warfare. Acts of libricide go back over two thousand years. [1] It is the non-accidental destruction of libraries and books by actors with political or moral intention. Like genocide, such actions transgress civilized boundaries and constitute crimes against humanity. [2]
Just a thought, take from it what you will. Review MeCASCADIAHowl/Trail 04:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, I took it as good advice and posted it with a note referring to your suggestion.