Talk:Pali Text Society

slight restructuring to enable linking to names?

Peter, I was thinking of slightly restructuring the sections so that a bookmark for each section could be linked from other articles. So in the Pali article, for example, it refers to this same Cousins. If I could link it adequately, the Pali article could (by clicking on Cousins) pop over to this paragraph about Cousins' tenure in the PTS. But each section will need to be made a little more explicit. I was thinking of moving the years of tenureship into the text itself, with a full sentence such as So-and-so was head of the Pali Text Society from 200x to 200y (paraphased, details wrongs. The reoccurrence of this sentence in each section would be slight repetitive--not as lean and spare as you like to write--but would make these sections more useful to someone landing from an outside article in helping them get oriented that this paragraph is talking about a leadership position of the PTS. If you are okay with it, I could change one section and you could review it. Or you could change it. And then we could link to it from the Pali article and see how it all works.

Alternatively, we could just create a brief article about each person. I'm fine with either method.Pat Palmer (talk) 17:49, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Have to think about this a while. Peter Jackson (talk) 10:33, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I see why. Maybe it's nice to leave the years of tenure in the title. Maybe instead, the ones referred to elsewhere deserve a small article of their own. You would probably need to write those. I'm thinking of the various professors you refer to in the Pali Canon article, mainly. Hey, no pressure!Pat Palmer (talk) 14:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Bear in mind also this article is about PTS. I thought it might liven it up to include a bit of human interest. But not too much. Peter Jackson (talk) 10:13, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Website

I see WP's finally caught up with the new one, set up in Feb. Peter Jackson (talk) 04:22, 5 June 2023 (CDT)

Yes, quite a lag in there. Somebody (I didn't look to see who) must have decided to change it. On a related Wikipedia topic, I tried adding the statistics of how many lynchings occurred in Tennessee in the decades after the civil war (214 over fifty years) and the edit, though documented, was reverted within an hour with the comment "Probably too much information". History of places in Wikipedia is fully sanitized of any past negativity. It motivates me to keep CZ going. Search engines are no longer going to bring up our articles as often (or at all) now that AI has taken over the search business, but the AI behind the search engines will still scan our articles for content and deliver it that way, so I'm not despairing yet. I'll just keep adding this sort of information here.Pat Palmer (talk) 12:27, 5 June 2023 (CDT)

Pat, I just looked at your Tennessee edit and you were a victim of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, which is invariably the true reason for reversion, though none of the pseudos would ever admit it. Anyone can edit, eh? John (talk) 19:03, 5 June 2023 (CDT)