| Revision as of 13:21, 14 June 2012 editMr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators59,191 edits →Speedy deletion nomination of Flowerhorn: Removing - wrong user← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:18, 14 June 2012 edit undoPrioryman (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, Pending changes reviewers27,962 edits Your questionNext edit → | ||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| <div style="float:left">]</div><div style="background-color:#cff;margin-left:55px;border:white dotted 4px;background:lightyellow;padding:4px;{{border-radius|8px}}">I have mentioned you at ]. If you wish to comment please take note of the guidelines at the top of the page and either the same page or ] may be suitable. Thanks --] (]) 09:48, 7 June 2012 (UTC) ] (]) 09:48, 7 June 2012 (UTC)</div>{{clear}} | <div style="float:left">]</div><div style="background-color:#cff;margin-left:55px;border:white dotted 4px;background:lightyellow;padding:4px;{{border-radius|8px}}">I have mentioned you at ]. If you wish to comment please take note of the guidelines at the top of the page and either the same page or ] may be suitable. Thanks --] (]) 09:48, 7 June 2012 (UTC) ] (]) 09:48, 7 June 2012 (UTC)</div>{{clear}} | ||
| ==Your question== | |||
| There's two angles I'd point you to; first, that people on WR/Wikipediocracy have been carrying out a campaign to get Wikimedia UK stripped of its charitable status. Fae is, of course, a big cheese in WMUK. The other angle that seems relevant to me is the one alluded to by Tarc; WR/Wikipediocracy seems to have become a hub for anti-sex campaigners like our very own Jayen466. Fae has become a target for the anti-sex mob due some of his previous editing and his defence of sexual content on Misplaced Pages. Are you aware that Jayen has teamed up with a banned user to lobby Parliament in person against WMUK and Fae in particular? ] (]) 20:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:18, 14 June 2012
 | Welcome to my talk page! Unless you request otherwise, I will generally respond to your message here. |
Newsletters.
Check RfAs.
WP:ADREV.
Statistics on most-viewed neuroscience pages.
User:Skysmith/Missing topics about Neurology
Commons:Category:Smilies
 Archives |
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
Adminship?
Hi there Tryptofish. I just had this crazy idea that you might want to think about. I was wondering if you'd ever be interested in being an admin. You seem experienced and clueful enough. Unless you've got any hidden skeletons, I'd be happy to nominate you if you'd like. Let me know if you're interested. AD 23:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Aiken, and thank you so very much! I am very flattered by what you said. I'm going to say "no thank you", for the time being, while leaving the door open for later on, like maybe a year from now. In brief, I personally do not feel ready for it yet, and I'm at a stage in real life when I temporarily cannot offer the project the additional time that this would take. I can explain all of that at greater length if you'd like, but that's the WP:KISS version. But sometime later: who knows. Thank you again for the very kind words. Best, --Tryptofish (talk) 00:05, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Even though I've archived subsequent talk threads, I'm intentionally leaving this thread at the top of my talk page. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Personal Question
It says you have a Doctorate of Philosophy in Biochemistry. Did I read that right? How do philosophy and biochemistry intersect? It sounds like a subject matter I'd be very interested in.Jasonnewyork (talk) 18:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, they don't. A Doctor of Philosophy or Ph.D. degree (which see) simply means that it's a doctoral degree in what I guess one could call basic studies, as opposed to a Doctor of Medicine or Doctor of Law, or other "professional" doctorates. It doesn't mean study of philosophy at all. My field of study was biochemistry, cell biology, and molecular biology. In my later academic career, I've specialized in neuroscience. If you are interested, I know that there are various programs in the history of science, and one can also study philosophy of science, which focuses on how it applies to science, though not necessarily to biochemistry. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:24, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
- I was thinking that might be the case. It's good to know a good neuroscientist. I used to read Scientific Mind on a regular basis, but I'd forgotten about it lately. I'll have to check it out again. Any other good sites for layman-esque-level articles on neuroscience?Jasonnewyork (talk) 17:35, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- One that comes to mind is this: Brainfacts.org. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:33, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- Cool site. I'll check it out. thanks.Jasonnewyork (talk) 04:56, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
- One that comes to mind is this: Brainfacts.org. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:33, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
- I was thinking that might be the case. It's good to know a good neuroscientist. I used to read Scientific Mind on a regular basis, but I'd forgotten about it lately. I'll have to check it out again. Any other good sites for layman-esque-level articles on neuroscience?Jasonnewyork (talk) 17:35, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Notification
Your question
There's two angles I'd point you to; first, that people on WR/Wikipediocracy have been carrying out a campaign to get Wikimedia UK stripped of its charitable status. Fae is, of course, a big cheese in WMUK. The other angle that seems relevant to me is the one alluded to by Tarc; WR/Wikipediocracy seems to have become a hub for anti-sex campaigners like our very own Jayen466. Fae has become a target for the anti-sex mob due some of his previous editing and his defence of sexual content on Misplaced Pages. Are you aware that Jayen has teamed up with a banned user to lobby Parliament in person against WMUK and Fae in particular? Prioryman (talk) 20:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC)