Talk:3118: iNaturalist Animals and Plants - Revision history

92.23.2.228 at 07:36, 26 July 2025

2025-07-26T07:36:48Z

70.16.143.48: lunatic

2025-07-25T19:34:43Z

lunatic

82.132.247.115 at 08:28, 25 July 2025

2025-07-25T08:28:14Z

82.132.247.115 at 08:27, 25 July 2025

2025-07-25T08:27:24Z

70.16.143.48: signed

2025-07-24T22:41:15Z

signed

70.16.143.48: hahaha

2025-07-24T22:40:13Z

hahaha

82.132.244.85 at 22:34, 24 July 2025

2025-07-24T22:34:34Z

82.132.244.85 at 22:33, 24 July 2025

2025-07-24T22:33:01Z

82.132.244.85 at 22:29, 24 July 2025

2025-07-24T22:29:10Z

82.132.244.85 at 22:28, 24 July 2025

2025-07-24T22:28:35Z

@@ Line 80: / Line 80: @@
 :This is actually an ideal article to use a (sortable) table for, in the Explanation itself. Three columns: State, Animal and Plant. In that, you can link each state and the first (and perhaps only) appearance of any wikilinkable fauna/flora. (You could add a symbol/key to each entry that's an invasive species, or use cell hues on a scale of green=natural to red=devestatingly displacing. ''Maybe'' fourth/fifth columns for such notes about the iNaturalist data, including what ''actually'' is officially the most common thing, objectively. But maybe not, if it clutters things up too much.)
 :And I also wouldn't trust an AI to write a script to do this. (Why not just ask the AI to give you the result directly, if you're so inclined?) Nor would I think it worthwhile to do such a convoluted way of doing such a simple task that's not even being reliably automated so that you could [[1205: Is It Worth the Time?|repeat it]]. Just think/act for yourself, in cases like these. AI is the new [[2267: Blockchain]], and still not in a good way. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.244.114|82.132.244.114]] 19:28, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
 I noticed that if you go to Randall's Bluesky account [https://bsky.app/profile/xkcd.com here] and check the alt-text for the comics, there's a basic transcript available. Here's the one for today:

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 :::::::: No, if your "correction" sticks to the sociopolitical agenda of the "editors" in charge, you won't have a problem.  The site itself conveys many controversial opinions... but only the ones that align with their echo chamber.[[Special:Contributions/70.16.143.48|70.16.143.48]]
 ::::::::: I refer you again to the unlikelihood that "what a comic is" even has such biases that you might consider relevent, which is the only reason we're having this conversation. I can't, and won't, tell you that there aren't issues where wikipedia's group consensus is antithetical to your personal opinion, whatever that might be, and vice-versa. But I think you place too much credit to imagine the nebulous 'They' have rendered even the most utterly tangential articles to inaccurately support whatever particular agenda you consider Them wanting to to push. To declare "the literal least reliable source of information on the planet" is laughably wrong. I could point you at North Korean TV, as an easy counterexample, and various other broadcasters (trying here to ''not'' accidentally name one that you personally treat as sacrosanct, with no way to guess which perspective you might lean). Listing social media accounts that you might find eternally ludicrous (again, no names, as maybe there'll be some of these you might consider the fountainhead of true knowledge) or other websites (wiki-like and otherwise) could be trivial.
 ::::::::: But my apologies. In the last response I had intended to grant you the right of having the last word, before officially bowing out, and that would have saved this whole repetition and restating of opinion. So you may have your final word, below, instead. I think we remain at an impass that I'm sure nobody else wants me to prolong further. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.247.115|82.132.247.115]] 08:27, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
 :::How often did Prince Valiant or Spider Man have a joke?  Also, so many of the zombine strips on the "funny" pages haven't been humourous for years. [[Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:2C|2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:2C]] 20:23, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
 :::: Re: spider man; multiple times in every single issue.  Re: zombine strips; now we're talking short-form graphic novels, not comics.[[Special:Contributions/70.16.143.48|70.16.143.48]]

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 :::::::: No, if your "correction" sticks to the sociopolitical agenda of the "editors" in charge, you won't have a problem.  The site itself conveys many controversial opinions... but only the ones that align with their echo chamber.[[Special:Contributions/70.16.143.48|70.16.143.48]]
 ::::::::: I refer you again to the unlikelihood that "what a comic is" even has such biases that you might consider relevent, which is the only reason we're having this conversation. I can't, and won't, tell you that there aren't issues where wikipedia's group consensus is antithetical to your personal opinion, whatever that might be, and vice-versa. But I think you place too much credit to imagine the nebulous 'They' have rendered even the most utterly tangential articles to inaccurately support whatever particular agenda you consider Them wanting to to push. To declare "the literal least reliable source of information on the planet" is laughably wrong. I could point you at North Korean TV, as an easy counterexample, and various other broadcasters (trying here to ''not'' accidentally name one that you personally treat as sacrosanct, with no way to guess which perspective you might lean). Listing social media accounts that you might find eternally ludicrous (again, no names, as maybe there'll be some of these you might consider the fountainhead of true knowledge) or other websites (wiki-like and otherwise) could be trivial.
-:::::::::: But my apologies. In the last response I had intended to grant you the right of having the last word, before officially bowing out, and that would have saved this whole repetition and restating of opinion. So you may have your final word, below, instead. I think we remain at an impass that I'm sure nobody else wants me to prolong further. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.247.115|82.132.247.115]] 08:27, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
+::::::::: But my apologies. In the last response I had intended to grant you the right of having the last word, before officially bowing out, and that would have saved this whole repetition and restating of opinion. So you may have your final word, below, instead. I think we remain at an impass that I'm sure nobody else wants me to prolong further. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.247.115|82.132.247.115]] 08:27, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
 :::How often did Prince Valiant or Spider Man have a joke?  Also, so many of the zombine strips on the "funny" pages haven't been humourous for years. [[Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:2C|2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:2C]] 20:23, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
 :::: Re: spider man; multiple times in every single issue.  Re: zombine strips; now we're talking short-form graphic novels, not comics.[[Special:Contributions/70.16.143.48|70.16.143.48]]

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 ::::::: And if you can't find ''any'' more badly written resources elsewhere, even for something pointedly marked as a stub, you're either not looking hard enough or you're in thrall to the wrongheaded information sources concerned for a particular subject. Keep an open mind (but not so open that your brain gets replaced). "Trust but verify" is a reasonable mantra, and Wikipedia helps with the latter more than most places. But somehow ''this'' wiki seems to have become the place where this is being discussed (anecdotally), in a way that would rightfully rejected in any actual wiki-type article as being unreferenced. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.244.85|82.132.244.85]] 22:28, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
 :::::::: No, if your "correction" sticks to the sociopolitical agenda of the "editors" in charge, you won't have a problem.  The site itself conveys many controversial opinions... but only the ones that align with their echo chamber.[[Special:Contributions/70.16.143.48|70.16.143.48]]
 :::How often did Prince Valiant or Spider Man have a joke?  Also, so many of the zombine strips on the "funny" pages haven't been humourous for years. [[Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:2C|2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:2C]] 20:23, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
 :::: Re: spider man; multiple times in every single issue.  Re: zombine strips; now we're talking short-form graphic novels, not comics.[[Special:Contributions/70.16.143.48|70.16.143.48]]

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 ::::::: If your 'correction' is correct, and you're sticking to clear and objective truths, you won't have a problem. If you're prone to conveying controversial opinions, I imagine that you might have a different experience. To not reasonably trust the current "comic" page, for example, or (if you tried to make any) failed to have any of your suggested changes stand, it probably says more about you.
 ::::::: And if you can't find ''any'' more badly written resources elsewhere, even for something pointedly marked as a stub, you're either not looking hard enough or you're in thrall to the wrongheaded information sources concerned for a particular subject. Keep an open mind (but not so open that your brain gets replaced). "Trust but verify" is a reasonable mantra, and Wikipedia helps with the latter more than most places. But somehow ''this'' wiki seems to have become the place where this is being discussed (anecdotally), in a way that would rightfully rejected in any actual wiki-type article as being unreferenced. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.244.85|82.132.244.85]] 22:28, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
-:::::::: No, if your "correction" sticks to the sociopolitical agenda of the "editors" in charge, you won't have a problem.  The site itself conveys many controversial opinions... but only the ones that align with their echo chamber.
+:::::::: No, if your "correction" sticks to the sociopolitical agenda of the "editors" in charge, you won't have a problem.  The site itself conveys many controversial opinions... but only the ones that align with their echo chamber.[[Special:Contributions/70.16.143.48|70.16.143.48]]
 :::How often did Prince Valiant or Spider Man have a joke?  Also, so many of the zombine strips on the "funny" pages haven't been humourous for years. [[Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:2C|2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:2C]] 20:23, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
 :::: Re: spider man; multiple times in every single issue.  Re: zombine strips; now we're talking short-form graphic novels, not comics.[[Special:Contributions/70.16.143.48|70.16.143.48]]

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 ::::: Not to say that Wikipedia is the ''most'' reliable source (always worth a check elsewhere, if it really matters), but it's potentially far more reliable than many of its alternatives. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.246.160|82.132.246.160]] 20:36, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
 :::::: I'm sure you believe that you're honestly being "precise", but I strongly, strongly urge and implore you to go and attempt to make a change on a wikipedia "article" that you believe is wrong.  Seriously, go try it.[[Special:Contributions/70.16.143.48|70.16.143.48]]
-::::::: If your 'correction' is correct, and you're sticking to clear and objective truths, you won't have a problem. If you're prone to conveying controversial opinions, I imagine that you might have a different experience. To not reasonably trust the current "comic" page, for example, or (if you tried to make any) failed to have any of your suggested changes stand (if you made any), it probably says more about you.
+::::::: If your 'correction' is correct, and you're sticking to clear and objective truths, you won't have a problem. If you're prone to conveying controversial opinions, I imagine that you might have a different experience. To not reasonably trust the current "comic" page, for example, or (if you tried to make any) failed to have any of your suggested changes stand, it probably says more about you.
-::::::: And if you can't find ''any''  more badly written resources elsewhere, even for something pointedly marked as a stub, you're either not looking hard enough or you're in thrall to the wrongheaded information sources concerned for a particular subject. Keep an open mind (but not so open that your brain gets replaced). "Trust but verify" is a reasonable mantra, and Wikipedia helps with the latter more than most places. But somehow ''this'' wiki seems to have become the place where this is being discussed (anecdotally), in a way that would rightfully rejected in any actual wiki-tyle article as being unreferenced. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.244.85|82.132.244.85]] 22:28, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
+::::::: And if you can't find ''any'' more badly written resources elsewhere, even for something pointedly marked as a stub, you're either not looking hard enough or you're in thrall to the wrongheaded information sources concerned for a particular subject. Keep an open mind (but not so open that your brain gets replaced). "Trust but verify" is a reasonable mantra, and Wikipedia helps with the latter more than most places. But somehow ''this'' wiki seems to have become the place where this is being discussed (anecdotally), in a way that would rightfully rejected in any actual wiki-tyle article as being unreferenced. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.244.85|82.132.244.85]] 22:28, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
 :::How often did Prince Valiant or Spider Man have a joke?  Also, so many of the zombine strips on the "funny" pages haven't been humourous for years. [[Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:2C|2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:2C]] 20:23, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
 :::: Re: spider man; multiple times in every single issue.  Re: zombine strips; now we're talking short-form graphic novels, not comics.[[Special:Contributions/70.16.143.48|70.16.143.48]]