Misplaced Pages

User talk:WLU: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:42, 16 August 2013 edit71.108.136.183 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 08:28, 23 January 2024 edit undo2603:6081:78f0:7410:c9b:590:c473:bda (talk)No edit summary 
(95 intermediate revisions by 34 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Not around|3=June 2021}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|maxarchivesize = 250K |maxarchivesize = 250K
Line 10: Line 11:
|- |-
|align = "center" bgcolor= indigo| If I judge it requires discretion, I'll contact you. This is tremendously one-sided. I assure you, I feel terrible about it. Really I do. |align = "center" bgcolor= indigo| If I judge it requires discretion, I'll contact you. This is tremendously one-sided. I assure you, I feel terrible about it. Really I do.
|-
|align="center" bgcolor= red|'''Note that my contributions are down a lot these days, I'm busy with other stuff, but otherwise fine. Also note that for some reason I'm not getting e-mail alerts when this page is edited, so for important issues please send me an e-mail directly.'''
|} |}


Line 29: Line 32:
*]}} *]}}


== Precious anniversary ==
== ] missing description details ==


{{User QAIbox
<div style="padding:5px; background-color:#E1F1DE;">'''Dear uploader:''' The media file you uploaded as:
| title = Three years ago ...
*]
| image = Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
| image_upright = 0.5

| bold = fringe topics
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for ],
| normal = ... you were recipient<br /> no. ''']''' of ],<br /> a prize of QAI!
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
}}

It's five years now! --] (]) 06:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
If you have any questions, please see ]. Thank you. ] (]) 09:42, 14 April 2013 (UTC) </div><!-- Template:Add-desc-l -->

== ] closed ==

An arbitration case regarding sexology has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
#] are authorized for all articles dealing with transgender issues and paraphilia classification (e.g., ]).
#] and ] are banned from interacting with each other, commenting on and/or commenting about each other including their professional lives, works and on-wiki activities. This applies to all namespaces, but excludes dispute resolution that explicitly relates to both parties.
#] is indefinitely banned from the topic of ], including biographical articles.

For the Arbitration Committee, ] <sup>(]•]•]•])</sup> 12:59, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

:''']'''

== Acupuncture and Biomedical Correlate ==

Review request for a review on the ACUPUNCTURE page, first paragraph. See the Talk page, "Physical correlates of acupoints" section and "Physical correlates of acupoints, Part Two." I am concerned that an ethnocentric bias on the part of editors has prevented a simple edit. The editors stand by some very shaky references and will not accept references from the most prestigious universities in the world, including those in China. At issue, the current article reads inaccurately, "Scientific investigation has not found any histological or physiological correlates for traditional Chinese concepts such as qi, meridians and acupuncture points," and yet I have sourced numerous peer reviewed studies from reputable sources showing MRI brain activity, hemodynamic and oxygen pressure correlates. Please review, I think you will find the hard science very interesting. Please let me know if this request is OK. ] (]) 16:22, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

:Your entire objection, from what I can tell of your actual edits (your talk page postings are ]) seem to be based on . This is a ], which according to ] are to be used with caution, if at all. Given the actual study - a single measure of a small number of subjects, on a single acupuncture point on the wrist - there is no reason to claim vindication of all acupuncture points on all humans justifying all claims made about acupuncture's health effects. I wouldn't even note this in the body unless there is considerable replication and extension.
:Also, it would be extremely helpful if you changed your signature to match your editor name, as otherwise it is confusing and difficult to link your actual talk page postings with your mainspace edits. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 16:38, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

::Thank you for the feedback. I cited many other reputable sources, all were shot down. However, the sources in place are not very good if not inconsistent and don't even stack up to the array of references I have given from multitudes of sources, each with quotes and explanations. I am not trying to assert that all acupuncture points have been measured with correlates, but the current acupuncture says there are no correlates whatsoever, which is a misrepresentation based on papers and studies of small scale that are not peer reviewed or based on placebo controlled, randomized trials. I appreciate the effort.] (]) 17:07, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

:::For the love of God, please change your signature block.
:::I've looked at your references and am unimpressed. When a real signal exists, science will, over time, converge on that signal and reduce the noise. While it is possible there are specific effects for specific points, I don't believe there is a consensus yet regarding which points and which specifics. Looking at Choi et al., from what I can tell the only source that can actually be used, it's at best suggestive. Science has not yet converged on an answer. If your sources were shot down, then you either need better sources or need to cite the policy-based reason you think the "shooting down" was not appropriate. I frankly am uninterested in reading a massive wall of text - all I want to see are the references, which I will parse similar to my response ]. Based on this source, it is far too early to state that this is a slam-dunk and that acupuncture points exist. Please focus your efforts on recent review articles, not primary sources, as that will produce the most fruitful discussions. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 17:29, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

:::: I too am unimpressed. Just because the brain reacts ("showing MRI brain activity, hemodynamic and oxygen pressure correlates") when a needle is poked into a point, claimed to be an acupuncture point, is no proof of anything special with that point. A needle poked at ANY locality nearby will also elicit measurable responses in the brain. Big deal. The ONLY thing being proven is what's obvious....brain cells are connected to body parts. Duh! There is still no evidence of predictable cures for any disease. There is still no evidence of a clear physiological or histological difference between acupuncture points and nearby points. No anatomy or histology textbook contains such information. ], an extremely important and major figure in acupuncture, was correct: "The traditional acupuncture points are no more real than the black spots a drunkard sees in front of his eyes" and "The meridians of acupuncture are no more real than the meridians of geography." His views should not be suppressed from the article. -- ] (]) 04:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)


... and six! --] (]) 07:32, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
== Question about BLP policy ==


... and seven --] (]) 06:41, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi WLU. When editing a BLP, does the policy apply also to an organisation associated with the person? Or just the person himself/herself? I am looking at WP:BLPGROUP] which seems to suggest it does not apply, and only normal policies do. The article in particular is a BLP on ], a religious guru. There are a number of reliable sources in relation to the activities of his organisation, but a very limited number of sources about the man himself. Cheers ] (]) 10:19, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
:I'm not an expert on BLP by any means, I actually avoid contributing to a lot of LP pages because of it (too complicated). My understanding of it is that BLP applies everywhere - talk pages, discussion boards, and certainly main pages. BLPGROUP is more about corporations, which are considered persons through a bit of trickery - the standards for corporations are lower. Individuals within the corporation however, are bound by BLP. Basically, if you're saying something about a group - the standards for sources is a bit lower. If you're saying someone about a person who happens to be a member of the group, your standards are higher and you must exert greater caution. If the sources are primarily about the group Bhagavan leads, you can't say much about the man himself unless the sources specifically make a point that applies to him. If there are few sources about Bhagavan, you might want to merge his page into his group's page.
:Much wiser guidance can be found on the ]. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 20:23, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks, it may call for the creation of a separate page covering the group. ] (]) 00:56, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
== Misplaced Pages:HITLER listed at ] ==


== Ritual Abuse ==
]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ]. Since you had some involvement with the ''Misplaced Pages:HITLER'' redirect, you might want to participate in ] (if you have not already done so). <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> <font color="red">—&#91;</font>](])<font color="red">&#93;—</font> 08:44, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


Dear WLU,
== ] ==
is my assumption correct that your of the opinion that faith based abuse doesn't occur? And why exactly would you come to that conclusion given the number of media reports, police investigations and court cases? As described in ] this type of abuse occurs in many communities. Subsets of the Nigerian community for example. I would just be very interested as to why it is that you want to present the topic in that manner. I would be very interested in talking to you or communicating via e-mail on this topic. Let me know if that would be of interest.--'''] ]''' 09:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
I did also link the article ] for disambiguation in the article Ritual abuse, that you wrote 68 % of.--'''] ]''' 09:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
:I have no opinion on faith-based abuse. The satanic ritual abuse moral panic was a moral panic, and the few "real" cases were people dressing up in robes while raping children - not an organized satanic cult. In other words, the "ritual" aspects were secondary to the rape.
:I am not interested in communicating on this further. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 13:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
::It's a bit premature to say ''welcome back'' but, hey, I have to work with I've got, so '''welcome back!''' ] (]) 23:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
::::Definitely not "welcome back", which is a pity. For wikipedia. Because I'm amazing. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)


::: It wasn't my intention to emphasise the "ritual" aspect of this. From what I understand mostly this has nothing to do with any kind of faith but rather with organised crime and power. However when it does occur that groups get to gather and in organised ways rape, torture and kill children and adults then the victims (if they survive) are often not believed because people find the article on ritual abuse and come to the conclusion that everything is made up. This is absolutely not fair and horrible for the victims and makes it hard to stop these crimes from going on... That is all I wanted to say. I would really like to collaborate on having an article next to satanic ritual abuse that described actual cases of extreme organised sexual absue, for which much evidence can be found in different countries and cultures from all over the world. I'll if I'll find someone else to work on that with then...--'''] ]''' 17:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
Back in 2009 you PRODded this, and it was deleted. Undeletion has now been ], so per ] I have restored it, and now notify you in case you wish to consider AfD. Regards, ] (]) 17:57, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
::::My concern is that, while the ritual abuse moral panic is a distinct "thing", a social phenomena that is written about in a coherent manner in the scholarly literature. The ] page, in addition to its capitalization problems, seems to trip over two aspects of ], specifically ] and ]. As for being original research, a quick skim of the references, for instance, seem to be closer to the ] page than anything else (McFadyen 1993, Richardson, 2015, and Scott, 2001 are, from my recall, about the satanic ritual abuse moral panic, though from an uncritical believer perspective) and would likely be better placed there. The rest is just kind of a list of cultural practices that have no real link to each other. Are the lip plates of the Mursi tribe actually a form of "ritual child abuse"? Certainly tattooing young girls in the Apatani tribe so they would not be abducted doesn't strike me as even close to "ritual" abuse. And the definition of "abuse" is very culturally determined, since within a specific cultural context it might be seen as abusive to '''not''' give a child ritual tattoos, lip extenders, and neck rings. While I personally consider such practices distasteful, within the culture it's considered beautifying. Breast flattening is another example where it causes harm, but is done to preserve chastity. Where is the "ritual"? An overall comment or question would be, where is the ] that labels these things to be "ritual child abuse" rather than "cosmetic mutilation"? Right now it seems like it is the wikipedia editors who are putting these items into a bucket, when it should be the ''sources'' that do so.
::::And where do dowries come into it? Where is the ritual? Dowries are at least an economic issue more than they would seem to be a ritual practice. Why bring up fire-related deaths?
::::Overall the article strikes me as extremely problematic and based more on the beliefs of the editors writing the page rather than the consensus, or even disagreement, of relevant scholars. I don't see why there should be a page where all of these items are listed in a hodge-podge, rather than the information now found on the page simply being part of a section in a main article. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
== Nomination of ] for deletion ==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ].


The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
== Help request ==
I am new and I am not up to speed on editing yet. I saw this paragraph in an article you had worked on and it seemed...POV...not sure of the word to use.


Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd notice --> ] (]) 02:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/William_Donald_Kelley


== Precious anniversary ==
"In the 1970s, Kelley looked forward to a fair and proper evaluation of his controversial metabolic diet methods, but he eventually became despondent and paranoid due to fierce opposition from the medical orthodoxy regarding his treatment plan. He wrote a book entitled "One Answer to Cancer," detailing his experiences as well as his methods. By the 1980s, his marriage had broken up, he had lost control of his once-thriving organization, his dental license had been revoked, and his mental and physical health had deteriorated. Kelley died of a heart attack on January 30, 2005 in Arkansas City.
{{User QAIbox/auto|years=Nine}} --] (]) 08:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
==Orphaned non-free image File:Michelle Remembers.jpg==
] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]).


Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 17:24, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
It sounds like a PR pamphlet or an apology from one of the faithful. Mostly the first sentence. Could you give me a little input here? Thanks.

Latest revision as of 08:28, 23 January 2024

This user may have left Misplaced Pages. WLU has not edited Misplaced Pages since June 2021. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Please note that I usually don't do e-mail; if it's about wikipedia use my talk page.
If I judge it requires discretion, I'll contact you. This is tremendously one-sided. I assure you, I feel terrible about it. Really I do.
Note that my contributions are down a lot these days, I'm busy with other stuff, but otherwise fine. Also note that for some reason I'm not getting e-mail alerts when this page is edited, so for important issues please send me an e-mail directly.

Archives


This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Precious anniversary

Three years ago ...
fringe topics
... you were recipient
no. 356 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

It's five years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

... and six! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

... and seven --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:41, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Ritual Abuse

Dear WLU, is my assumption correct that your of the opinion that faith based abuse doesn't occur? And why exactly would you come to that conclusion given the number of media reports, police investigations and court cases? As described in Ritual Child Abuse this type of abuse occurs in many communities. Subsets of the Nigerian community for example. I would just be very interested as to why it is that you want to present the topic in that manner. I would be very interested in talking to you or communicating via e-mail on this topic. Let me know if that would be of interest.--Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 09:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC) I did also link the article Ritual child abuse for disambiguation in the article Ritual abuse, that you wrote 68 % of.--Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 09:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

I have no opinion on faith-based abuse. The satanic ritual abuse moral panic was a moral panic, and the few "real" cases were people dressing up in robes while raping children - not an organized satanic cult. In other words, the "ritual" aspects were secondary to the rape.
I am not interested in communicating on this further. WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/complex 13:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
It's a bit premature to say welcome back but, hey, I have to work with I've got, so welcome back! Johnuniq (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Definitely not "welcome back", which is a pity. For wikipedia. Because I'm amazing. WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/complex 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
It wasn't my intention to emphasise the "ritual" aspect of this. From what I understand mostly this has nothing to do with any kind of faith but rather with organised crime and power. However when it does occur that groups get to gather and in organised ways rape, torture and kill children and adults then the victims (if they survive) are often not believed because people find the article on ritual abuse and come to the conclusion that everything is made up. This is absolutely not fair and horrible for the victims and makes it hard to stop these crimes from going on... That is all I wanted to say. I would really like to collaborate on having an article next to satanic ritual abuse that described actual cases of extreme organised sexual absue, for which much evidence can be found in different countries and cultures from all over the world. I'll if I'll find someone else to work on that with then...--Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 17:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
My concern is that, while the ritual abuse moral panic is a distinct "thing", a social phenomena that is written about in a coherent manner in the scholarly literature. The Ritual Child Abuse page, in addition to its capitalization problems, seems to trip over two aspects of WP:NOT, specifically WP:OR and WP:NOTDIR. As for being original research, a quick skim of the references, for instance, seem to be closer to the satanic ritual abuse page than anything else (McFadyen 1993, Richardson, 2015, and Scott, 2001 are, from my recall, about the satanic ritual abuse moral panic, though from an uncritical believer perspective) and would likely be better placed there. The rest is just kind of a list of cultural practices that have no real link to each other. Are the lip plates of the Mursi tribe actually a form of "ritual child abuse"? Certainly tattooing young girls in the Apatani tribe so they would not be abducted doesn't strike me as even close to "ritual" abuse. And the definition of "abuse" is very culturally determined, since within a specific cultural context it might be seen as abusive to not give a child ritual tattoos, lip extenders, and neck rings. While I personally consider such practices distasteful, within the culture it's considered beautifying. Breast flattening is another example where it causes harm, but is done to preserve chastity. Where is the "ritual"? An overall comment or question would be, where is the reliable source that labels these things to be "ritual child abuse" rather than "cosmetic mutilation"? Right now it seems like it is the wikipedia editors who are putting these items into a bucket, when it should be the sources that do so.
And where do dowries come into it? Where is the ritual? Dowries are at least an economic issue more than they would seem to be a ritual practice. Why bring up fire-related deaths?
Overall the article strikes me as extremely problematic and based more on the beliefs of the editors writing the page rather than the consensus, or even disagreement, of relevant scholars. I don't see why there should be a page where all of these items are listed in a hodge-podge, rather than the information now found on the page simply being part of a section in a main article. WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/complex 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Mumps outbreaks in the 21st century for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mumps outbreaks in the 21st century is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mumps outbreaks in the 21st century until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Velayinosu (talk) 02:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Michelle Remembers.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Michelle Remembers.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Categories: