User talk:Smmurphy

User talk • Archives: 1 2

User:Smmurphy: Talk • Contributions • Personal bests • In progress • Scribbles • Heroes

I prefer not breaking up conversations. If you leave a message for me here, I will respond here.If I have started a conversation on your talk page, feel free to respond there, unless I forget, in which case you may feel free to ignore this message.

Crime in Omaha

Hey, I was just looking at the articles linking to Fort Omaha and came across your article-in-progress. Go! That is a great topic, and one that can/should be expanded in a lot of ways. I hope you bring it live soon, there's some things I want to add to it right away. Interestingly though, in my own research I did note that the troops at the Fort were noted for being called into quell the 1919 riots; I read that was the 1st time in US history the US military were used as a police force on US soil. Then, when reading about the 60s riots I noticed that the Nat'l Guard was called in on at least 3 separate occasions; where are those troops based out of? Hopefully they aren't at Fort Omaha, too, right? I mean, what better way to impose segregation than to have a resident military force in the neighborhood... But what a great note to make in your Crime in Omaha article. Looking forward to reading and sharing. Oh, and some of those crime citations are here. - Freechild 06:22, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you are perceptive. I started that article in March based on our discussion at Talk:Omaha, Nebraska#Incident in North Omaha (you can even see my original link to it, we were at odds a bit back then). As I mentioned, its based on the DC article of the same title (some of the DC stuff I didn't remove). The article is made up mostly of stuff from other WP pages, although this isn't the right way of working the article, I think. IMO, it shouldn't be a list of notable crimes in Omaha, but rather about crime, with notable crimes used only to illustrate trends. Doing this right is hard in the current WP environment, because new articles aren't accepted as easily. If I write an article like this and don't cite it well, its likely to get trimmed a lot or deleted. The problem with a trimmed article is that it looses its form and is more likely to turn into a list of notable crimes. So when talking about the trends, I have to cite things. Thus, it is in my user space, and also thus I haven't touched it since its creation in March.

If you want, you should feel free to edit it as if it were your own - if I don't like something, I'll let you know just as I would on any other page. You should also feel free to add any cited notable crimes you think are appropriate. Although I don't want the article to be decontextualized like that eventually, doing that now will allow us to figure out which notable crimes fit into the context of an article about crime in Omaha. Just now, I added some sections to give the article some of that structure. Thanks for the reminder. Hopefully I get the article into good enough shape that I feel comfortable bringing it live. If your threshold is lower than mine, go ahead and tell me, and we can bring it live sooner. Smmurphy^(Talk) 09:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My threshold must be lower, because like you've constantly reminded me, we've got to be bold. That much said, I understand your point about decontextualizing the normalcy of crime in Omaha, I think that the sensationalization of the few particularly heinous pieces that float to the top might serve as a reasonable starting point for the article. I will definitely take you up on your offer, and we can proceed together. Cool. In other news, perhaps related, I've gone live with Racial Tension in Omaha, Nebraska. Different from you, I have discovered that as long as these contentious topics are well-cited they can largely stand without comment. I've had that happen now with several N.O. topics, as well as some that deserve to be commented on but aren't, like this. Surviving the fires (like what you've seen me partake in) and getting those types of "wins" only emboldens me more... - Freechild 20:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just went and reread Talk:Omaha, Nebraska#Incident in North Omaha, and checked out your links there. I agree and disagree about your observations on the articles you like. Crime in Sydney would be more properly labeled "Historic Crime in Sydney", while Crime in Washington, D.C. would better be labeled "Current Crime in Washington, D.C." The threat of the DC article is the it takes away the context that the crimes occur within, namely the history of the place, its economics, and its culture. Likewise, the Sydney article takes away the present, de-emphasizing the current crimes within the city. I find that both articles emphasize the sensational crimes though, by focusing on violent crimes and attaching crimes to race and ethnicity. That is problematic, and definitely something I would work against in any article related to on crime in Omaha... That much said, when was the last case of white-collar crime in Omaha high-profile enough to get a mention in the media? And all of that said, fretting about getting it "just right" could prevent the article from going live and thwart our collective good intentions; better to get it up and let others respond to it - after its a little more "ready" to go up. - Freechild 20:30, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for input

In other, unrelated topics, I have cleaned up two articles extensively that I would request your input on: Racial Tension in Omaha, Nebraska and Civil Rights Movement in Omaha, Nebraska. I am working to clean the latter up enough to be considered for featured article, so any input you can provide would be sincerely appreciated. - Freechild 16:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both lack very much context (not historical context, but real, contemporary context), which is a frequent issue on WP. It is hard to put something into context without running into NPOV, but just reporting events makes for a pretty sad article. This is very similar to the discussion we had above, and perhaps you and I see this differently. While thinking about this, I remembered a recent blog entry I had read on CJR, and from which I wrote a draft of an essay. Let me know if this makes sense, I'll try to be more specific later, but I'd like to get a feel for your position on this question first.Smmurphy^(Talk) 17:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your concern, and your previous points about the decontextualization of history. That's an evident threat in any history, all of which from any perspective is always political. For what its worth, I think NPOV is a farce, for the most part; WP:ATT is a much better guideline, primarily because it addresses the reality that it isn't about truth, per se. That much said, I must admit that my own proximity to the present realities of Omaha is a little too fresh to be dispassionate about the writing. Too many friends, too many bad days... all that. So I don't know that I'm the "right" person to write about today. That much said, I also don't believe that WP should be an exercise in timidity or even caution; instead, it is about immediacy and even a bit of recklessness. So I stuck some 1/4 baked articles on line: well-cited, but absent current events. They are stilted. But they are now existent, and in a place like WP I thoroughly believe articles like what I've been writing are better off existing in a sub-par fashion rather than not at all. It then becomes the challenge of others to breath life into them, in any fashion. I would like to hear more about what you think though - I know I've got a lot to learn in this process from others. Thanks. - Freechild 06:50, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: copyfraud question

Smmurphy, I do not entirely feel qualified to answer your question. You will see on my talk page that Lupo (talk · contribs) has more adequately answered it. I apologise I could not be of more help, and I hope Lupo's advice helps out. If you need any more advice, I'm sure Lupo would offer it on my, your, or his or her talk page. --Iamunknown 08:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject World music invitation

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject World music

The goal of WikiProject World music is to improve the quality and quantity of information about World music available on Wikipedia. WP:WikiProject World music as a group does not prefer any particular type of World music, but prefers that all World music traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

-- TimNelson 10:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Social rule system

I just looked, and it's mostly the same; your version appears to be a little longer, but is otherwise word-for-word in most places. I think the chief problem is that it reads like an essay ("concluding remarks", numbered lists, arguments, ect), and it still appears to have been copied from somewhere (correct me if I'm wrong, though). --InShaneee 13:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It's written by Burns (who is the most often cited in the article), who wrote it as if WP were some sort of "encyclopedia sociologica." I saw a couple other (shorter) articles of his on AfD, which I wikified. They remained, and he asked that I take a look at his deleted article. We'll see how it goes. Best, Smmurphy^(Talk) 15:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]