Misplaced Pages

User talk:Raymond arritt: 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 19:21, 25 April 2008 editRaymond arritt (talk | contribs)13,222 edits Global Warming and related articles: verifiability← Previous edit Latest revision as of 05:14, 7 December 2024 edit undoCommonsDelinker (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors1,015,256 edits Replacing Cow_highland_cattle.jpg with File:Highland_cattle,_bull,_2005.jpg (by CommonsDelinker because: File renamed: Criterion 3 (obvious error) · this is a male one). 
(246 intermediate revisions by 72 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<table align="right">
{{User:MiszaBot/config
<tr><td><div style="float: left; border: solid #ffb466 1px; margin: 1px;">
|minthreadsleft = 1
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; color: #000000; background: #ffe496;"
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #ffb466; text-align: center;" |]
|algo = old(10d)
| style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This user is a member of '''RSMT''' - the "rational skepticism meatpuppet team".
|archive = User talk:Raymond arritt/Archive %(year)02d
|}</div></td></tr>
}}
<tr><td>{{archive box|<center>] ]</center>}}</td></tr>
<tr><td><table border=1px>
<tr><td><div style="float:right; width:220px; border:1px solid #A9A9A9; background-color:#fafaff; padding:3px; line-height: 1.3; margin-right: 4px;"></div></td></tr>
<tr><td>]<br>
] 08:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)]]
</td></tr>
</table></td></tr>
</table>


{{archive box|<center>] ]</center>}}


<br><hr><br>
<center><table bgcolor=#aaaa00><tr><td bgcolor=#ffff80><center><b>If you leave me a message on this page, I will reply on this page.<br>If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there; I'll watch your page and reply when able.</b></center></tr></td></table></center>




Line 16: Line 23:
<div style="font-size: x-large; width: 100%;"><span class="plainlinks" id="purgelink"></span></div> <div style="font-size: x-large; width: 100%;"><span class="plainlinks" id="purgelink"></span></div>
<div style="width:100%">{{#time:l|0 hours}}</div> <div style="width:100%">{{#time:l|0 hours}}</div>
<div style="background: #D3D3D3; color: #000;">'''{{#time:g|0 hours}}<span style="text-decoration:blink">:</span>{{#time:i a|0 hours}}''' ]</div> <div style="background: #D3D3D3; color: #000;">'''{{#time:H|0 hours}}<span style="text-decoration:blink">:</span>{{#time:i|0 hours}}''' ]</div>
</div> </div>


<!-- clock nicked from JzG who nicked it from ] who nicked it from Ryulong. --> <!-- clock nicked from JzG who nicked it from ] who nicked it from Ryulong. -->
<!-- modified by RWA to show 24 hour time. -->


{{Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/RfA Report}}
<b><font color="#a00000" size="+1">A note on email:</font></b> Misplaced Pages-related discussion should be carried on here, in view of the Misplaced Pages community. Following , I will not conduct Misplaced Pages business by private email. My email is enabled and you're welcome to initiate contact that way; however, I won't respond by email to your inquiry and will instead reply on-wiki.


<font size="+1"><b>Sorry I wasn't here to take your call. You can leave a message after the tone.</b></font>
<br>
<div style="float:right; width:220px; border:1px solid #A9A9A9; background-color:#fafaff; padding:3px; line-height: 1.3; margin-right: 4px;">
]
<br><hr><br>


== <font size="+2" color="#440090"><b>Tone</b></font> ==
] 08:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)]]
Hello Raymond. You have taken a previous interest in the "Arnoldo Aleman" page. Over a year ago you were involved in locking out my username "Spartanad" for edit warring. I had it coming that time but wonder if you might take another look at the page? I am trying to keep bias out of the "Corruption" section and am being twinkled and now personally attacked. In fact, the user "Brusegadi" is apparently trying to identify me personally, although unsuccessfully to this point. It seems to be personal, especially on the "El Pacto" portion of the discussion page. Would you please take a look and let me know your thoughts? ] (]) 04:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
</div>


== WTF? ==


So what the heck is going on around here these days? Do you think it's a full moon, or ], or ]? Or is the matrix starting to degrade? Even by Misplaced Pages's standards, this place is going nuts. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 16:33, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
{{Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/RfA Report}}


:Ah, so it's not just me. I've been wondering if it's a perverse form of . ] (]) 16:38, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
<div>
<font size="+1"><b>Sorry I wasn't here to take your call. You can leave a message after the tone.</b></font>
== <font size="+2" color="#440090"><b>Tone</b></font> ==


::Global warming. It's been above 100 here for the past 7 days, and it's only freaking May. I wonder if shoreline property on ] will be a good investment. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 16:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
== You guys are all losers ==
:::I just can't wait till the ] opens up. I'm tired of people giving global warming a bad rap. How cool will it be to be able to travel by boat from Nova Scotia to Alaska yearround? ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 16:22, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
::::Very cool. I was thinking how many seals and whales will live longer and more productive lives because polar bears will be extinct. People are so damn short-sighted about the melting of the ice caps.] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 16:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
:::::Actually, now that I see your new userbox, it all makes sense: "May is mental health awareness month". ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 17:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
::::::I think Dick Nixon kicked that off while Veep. ]<sup>]</sup> 19:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Interesting... not ]? :) ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 22:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
:::::Natural selection is good, is it not? ] (]) 23:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
::::::"Good"? That all depends on whether you're being selected ''for'' or selected ''against'', n'est-ce pas? ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 05:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


== Cla68 ==
bitches
:That's not very nice. ] (]) 15:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


when things get out of hand. Sadly, Cla68 is quite a good editor. I actually gave a little help out to one of his articles on an obscure Japanese medical officer from WWII. But it appears if you oppose his POV on anything else, he goes on attack. Apparently, you disagree with his global warming POV. Oh well. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 16:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
== CIV ==


:Didn't you know that Cla68, because of his featured content in a narrow area, is the final arbiter here? He is above Jimbo and Arbcomm. He is a '''V'''ery '''I'''mportant '''W'''ikipedian and has often been quoted in the press.--] (] | ]) 16:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
, thanks. I also agree that the bit about ''being'' dumb doesn't belong in the civility policy, but I'd argue that ] can stress others as well. ]&nbsp;(]) 23:17,&nbsp;],&nbsp;200<!--DT-->8


::Y'know, I was thinking as I was driving in to work today, I don't need this stuff. I'll wait and see what happens, but if he opens an arbcom case I'm outta here. Life is too short to waste time proving that . ] (]) 16:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
== Our friend again? ==
:::Aw hell, I servived a arbykom kase .. di'n't her me nun. ;) ]<sup>]</sup> 19:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


== Definite and indefinite ==
. New paper, but same modus operandi. BTW, I looked at the paper, and cannot reconcile the byline with the summary - any opinion by an expert would be welcome... --] (]) 21:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)


"Raymond Arrit is taking wikibreak"? You must be Russian guy, as do you not use indefinite article in sentence. :) Hey, the good news is that every period of lunacy is followed by a period of reactive sanity. (The bad news is that the reverse is also true). Methinks we're overdue. I can't run the global warming walled garden by myself; I'm too busy pushing the fringe POV that HIV causes AIDS. Have a good holiday weekend and keep up the good work. :) ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 00:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
:Raul already got him. ] (]) 09:59, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


::Ok. --] (]) 00:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC) :Only ] being Russian guy. ] (]) 00:12, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


::I like the excerpt on ]. A bit reminiscent of ]. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 22:49, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
:::5:1 odds ]. I prefer bottles of wine, but if you take it, I'm reasonably flexible about the fluid. --] (]) 07:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


:::That's brilliant. My ] is boringly predictable and has no witty excerpts. Clearly, I buy my socks at Wal-Mart, and you buy yours somewhere far more artsy. Perhaps you knit them yourself at Burning Man? ]<sup>]</sup> 05:46, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
::::Zot. Two bottles of ] for Stephan. ] (]) 09:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


== Allopathic ==
:::::You overestimate my flexibility - or my reasonableness? Anyways, glad you agree. ;-) --] (]) 11:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


Hi Raymond,
== GW disinformation and Misplaced Pages ==
I read your post about Commonname, and I read the page itself. Thanks for pointing this out. I agree with you, in general, I'm not sure which article you feel is misnamed, or even if you are suggesting that. The point you made about an osteopathic grad being referred to as an allopath is interesting. The problem is that I've never heard any physician referred to as an allopath. But I have read many sources which discuss an "osteopathic" graduate entering an "allopathic residency." Such a person is said to have "allopathic training." It wouldn't really make sense to say they had "MD" training, since they are still a DO. It would make sense to say they had "ACGME" training, since this is the body that accredits "allopathic" programs. Of course, this is all '''very''' confusing. But I do think it needs to be explained, not avoided. That's really the core of my point. Explain the terminology that is used, as neutrally as possible, using reliable sources.
This language is used by the people and the organizations that govern this process in the US. The National Residency Matching Program uses the term on its main page, and in all its reports on residents, matching, physicians workforce issues, etc. . As does the AMA, the AOA, etc, etc. Thoughts? ] ] 19:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


== Xiutwel and 9/11 ==
Re: - you're one of the few people here who's really competent to debunk the disinformation that Misplaced Pages's deniers constantly try to get included in our articles. Your non-participation makes it harder for the rest of us, as well as hurting the cause in general (of keeping Misplaced Pages's articles free of denier misinformation). I ask you to reconsider. ] (]) 20:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


Hey Raymond arritt, check out the section entitled hello on ] and inform me at ] on how I dealt with the questions that Xiutwel asked me. Cheers, <font face="Papyrus">]</font> <sup> ]</sup>'''<sub>]</sub>''' 18:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
:Oh no, I'll keep reverting junk, but won't engage Ron on talk pages because I don't see the point in subjecting myself to condescending abuse. ] (]) 22:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
:Ray-ray has left the building, unfortunately. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 18:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


== advice? ==
== ] and related articles ==


concerning ?
Raymond, I've noticed that you do a good job of helping keep the Global Warming and related articles NPOV, balanced, and complete. I've seen some complaints both on and off-wiki that those articles are supposedly a ] protected by a group of POV pushers. But seeing as how you're actively involved with them, I know that can't be the case and that I don't need to involve myself. Please keep up the great work. ] (]) 21:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


I'm not sure he's around much any more. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 23:52, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
:To paraphrase JzG, we should perhaps post a notice that "this article accurately reflects the scientific literature on the topic, and my goodness do some people hate that." ] (]) 22:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


== Hey Raymond ==
::"Accurately reflecting the scientific literature on a topic" is ''so'' ]. It's two-double-oh-eight, my friend. If you don't like what the World Health Organization has to say about a topic, just follow up their opinion with an article from the '']'' which rebuts them. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 05:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


I see you're not around, and don't know what precipitated your departure, but in case you occasionally ] and read here, I wanted to say I hope you'll be back - you were always a pleasure to work with, and we need people like you on the project. Drop me an email any time. All best <strong>]</strong>/<small>]</small> 19:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I would like to discuss with you what I feel are unjustified editorial 'qualifications' within a specific section of the ]. Specifically,


:One can hope. I am not so sure it is so likely, knowing what happened.--] (] | ]) 19:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
''Benny Peiser '''claimed''' to have found flaws in Oreskes' work, but his '''attempted''' refutation is disputed. Peiser later withdrew parts of his criticism, also commenting that "the overwhelming majority of climatologists is agreed that the current warming period is mostly due to human impact. However, this majority consensus is far from unanimous."''


== ] ==
The idea that he 'claimed' to have found flaws, when he did in fact find flaws in the methods used to determine consensus, is disingenuous. It's not an argument as to whether there is or is not a consensus, it's whether or not Oreskes' work could be used to prove or disprove that consensus exists. The answer to that is no it cannnot. While the fact that many of the 928 articles she cites 'agree' is certainly evidence, it's hardly a scientifically accurate sample of the available data. Especially since, as Peiser explained, many of the articles used in her 'study' have nothing whatsoever to do with climate change as an anthropogenic effect. Also, any refutation could be described as 'attempted', and in this case it amounts to an editorially biased commentary on the quality or effect of his findings. Please read --] (]) 21:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


I've emptied your sandbox for now, since it's getting picked up by template transclusion bots. Feel free to revert once you're back if you still need it. –<span style="font-family:Verdana;">] (])</span> 13:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
:Of course, Peiser claims that Peiser did it right (or partly right). The truth is that almost none of Peiser's abstracts had anything at all to do with global warming, much less disputing the consensus. Peiser is an anthropologist and was clearly out of his depth when trying to assess the scientific literature. See Tim Lambert's critique, among others. "Claimed" and "attempted" are in fact generous; one can make a strong case for "embarrasingly inaccurate," but we'll go with the softer wording. ] (]) 22:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


== NLP ==
::Um. Again, you have decided to look at Peiser's work as an attempt to discredit the idea that there is a consensus. That is not the case, as he has clearly stated. He was simply pointing out that Oreskes made bare assumptions of a consensus based on a non-scientific approach to inquiry, which he proved purely on the basis of the description of given search parameters used by Oreskes herself. I agree that there is more or less a consensus, in that the majority of climatologists, and other scientific experts in supporting or corollary fields, agree that to a greater or lessor extent there is an anthropogenic aspect to global climate change. The debate isn't, again, regarding whether or not this is the case, it's regarding whether or not Oreskes' findings represent a conclusive and scientifically viable study of the consensus itself. Again, the very simple and straight forward answer to this is no, her study was poorly structured and ill conceived from beginning to end. So the editorially charged 'qualifications' or Peiser's rebuttal are not only unnecessary, but are a direct attempt to legitimize Oreskes' study which in fact can only be used to discredit the idea that there '''is''' a consensus.--] (]) 22:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


I am proposing deletion of the entire set of articles on ]. See ]. NLP is an extraordinary pseudoscience that is so successful at disguising itself as real science that it had many people fooled for a long time. I'm amazed this has gone on for so long but enough is enough. I would appreciate any help on this as there is bound to be a bitter fight - there are a number of commercial interests involved and there is evidence of some inside support in Misplaced Pages itself. I have a separate file of information if you are interested, but for obvious reasons that cannot go on-wiki. Best. ] (]) 10:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
:::What Peiser tried to do was worth doing, but he botched it abysmally. If we add Peiser's unpublished debunking of Oreskes, we have to add the numerous unpublished debunkings of Peiser. So in the end the article will gain nothing but excess verbiage, and we'll unnecessarily add to Peiser's embarrassment. And we don't need to beat the "consensus" dead horse anyway since the national science academies of major industrialized nations have said there's a consensus. ] (]) 22:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


==New policy proposal and draft help==
::::I don't think we need to add either study. But I think that if we're going to qualify Peiser's study, we should have the good sense to qualify Oreskes' as well. Something along the lines of, 'A '''statistically questionable''' 2004 essay by Naomi Oreskes in the journal Science reported a survey of 928 abstracts of peer-reviewed papers related to global climate change in the ISI database.' would be sufficient to end this discussion. It's a matter of the pot and the kettle. If we call shenanigans on one poorly structured study, and not another, that smacks of bias and can unecessessarily color the discussion.--] (]) 23:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


]
:::::Oreskes' study was published in Nature and has stood up well to criticism. A sample size of 928 is indeed sufficient for statistical purposes - as an example, it is about the size used for many opinion polls in the US. Do you have any source for "statistically questionable"? --] (]) 23:11, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


I have drafted a new proposal and would like help in clarifying, adjusting, adapting, and improving it. It is based on five years of work here at Misplaced Pages (not always the prettiest, I might add). I think it summarizes the opinions of a great majority of editors as to how to handle scientific situations. This proposal serves as a nexus between ] and ] for cases where we are dealing with observable reality. It is needed because there are a lot of editors who don't seem to understand what entails best-practices when writing a reliable reference work about observable reality. I don't pretend that this version is perfect, and would appreciate any and all additions, suggestions people may have for getting to some well-regarded scientific standards.
::::::From Oreskes' own words. ''The 928 papers were divided into six categories: '''explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals''', methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. '''Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view'''; '''25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change.''' Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position. '''Admittedly, authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural.''' However, none of these papers argued that point.'' The first three categories do not directly coincide. Evaluation of impact, and mitigation proposals can be authored without having a distinct stance on whether or not climate change is largely anthropogenic. She also doesn't break up the, 75% into the distinct categories leading one to believe that they all are a direct 'endorsement of the consensus position'. Not too mention her use of 'implicit' could very well be subjective. Saying that since a portion of 75% of one type of paper regarding climate change were a direct endorsement of consensus, and that none of remaining 25% were a direct contradiction of it means that there is a general consensus is questionable. It's like taking that political survey, and saying that the undecideds will unquestionably agree with one side or the other. Once more, it's not a question of whether or not there is a consensus, it's a matter of whether or not her survey can be used as a accurate proof of it's existence. I do not believe that it can. It has worth to be sure, but the conclusions drawn, whether true or not, cannot be drawn purely from the evidence of her study.--] (]) 23:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


Note that these standards would apply only when discussing matters directly related to observable reality. These standards are inspired in part by ] but avoid some of the major pitfalls of that particular proposal. In particular, the idea that SPOV even exists is a real problem. However, I think it is undeniable that we should have some standards for writing about scientific topics.
← My goodness. I was being somewhat flippant above, but clearly we're in a post-irony Misplaced Pages. Oreskes' article was published in ''Nature''. Peiser's rebuttal was published... well... nowhere in the scientific literature, and is sourced to an op-ed column by Peiser in the '']''. The day that a paper in ''Nature'' can be scientifically "rebutted" by an op-ed column in a fairly partisan newspaper is a sad day for Misplaced Pages. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 23:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


See also ] for another failed proposal that dovetails with this one. I hope this particular proposal is more in-line with the hole I see in policy/guidelines for dealing with these situations.
:Addendum: It is a sad day for Misplaced Pages. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 03:16, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


] (]) 20:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


:Interesting in theory but unworkable. First, it will never become policy because there are too many people here who are bent on promoting nonsense, and too many influential administrators and editors who sympathize with them. Second, Misplaced Pages's core content policies such as ], ], and the like can be disregarded with impunity. What would be the benefit of having yet another toothless content policy on the books? ] (]) 17:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Raymond, It is obvious that the person with the quickest revert button has control and I have no interest in such. (My second post was because I thought that I must have exited too quickly with the first; then I checked the history.) The reality of greenhouse gasses will not go away. I will revisit occasionally just to follow the development. I am particularly interested in what happens as people become more knowledgable about optical spectroscopy and its relevance to AGW. ] (]) 19:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


==Attacks in {{#if:Robert M. Carter|the article ]|Misplaced Pages articles}}==
:Misplaced Pages isn't the place to promote original research that has never been published in a medium with a reputation for fact checking and accuracy (more at ]). For a scientific topic, that would ordinarily mean a peer-reviewed journal that is listed in the ISI ]. Rightly or wrongly, Misplaced Pages follows rather than leads the scientific literature (more at ]). You're welcome to try again after your work has been published in an academic journal and has made an impact on the field. ] (]) 19:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Please do not make personal attacks{{#if:Robert M. Carter|&#32;as you did at ]}}. Misplaced Pages has a strict policy against ]. ] and images '''are not tolerated''' by Misplaced Pages and are ]. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images, especially those in violation of our ] policy, will be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. Thank you. <!-- Template:attack --> ] (]) 19:12, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
:Raymond hasn't edited that article in the last 8 months, and this account has been entirely inactive for the past 3 months. What in the name of Odin's Beard are you ]? ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 20:23, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


==Public understanding of climate models==
== Your participation requested ==
I saw you wondering what public understanding is somewhere else, and thought I'd share this which is the best article I've seen and the source of most of what I know about the topic. I suspect that most people know that or less. Probably much less in some cases. If you have any recommended reading that's accessible on a pop-sci level I'd be interested. ] (]) 02:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


== Misplaced Pages's Expert Peer Review process (or lack of such) for Science related articles ==
(Cross-posted to several users' talk pages)


Hi - I posted the section with the same name on my talk page.
Your participation on ] would be appreciated. ] (]) 19:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Could you take part in discussion ?
Thanks
ARP
] (]) 19:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


User: Shotwell suggested (on my talk page) "I would endorse a WP:EXPERTADVICE page that outlined the wikipedia policies and goals for researchers in a way that enticed them to edit here in an appropriate fashion. Perhaps a well-maintained list of expert editors with institutional affiliation would facilitate this sort of highly informal review process. I don't think anyone would object to a well-maintained list of highly-qualified researchers with institutional affiliation (but then again, everyone seems to object to something)."
:Oh yes... about time. ] (]) 07:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


We could start with that if you would agree ... - could you help to push his idea through Misplaced Pages bureaucracy ?
== Courtesy ==


In my view people nominated as "expert reviewers" should be willing not to hide under the veil of anonymity. They should be able to demonstrate some level of the verifiable accomplishment / recognition in the domain of professional science .
Hi Raymond,
BTW, I do not see any reason why the anonymity of editors on Misplaced Pages is considered to be a "good thing". Above is my general opinion, so please don't take my statement personally.
There is obviously a choice given for everyone in Misplaced Pages either to act "in open" or to hide behind meaningless assumed pseudonym and I accept this situation.
BTW, I do understand current Misplaced Pages concept that in order to produce good Misplaced Pages science article, one does not need to be a professional scientist ... - that is fine with me ...
But I propose to have (at least optionally) ability to review/qualify such article by the professional scientist.
Cheers,
] (]) 15:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


==Afd of Mucoid plaque==
It came to my attention that you had some concerns and and have made a suggesting that I had been reverting to questionable practices. I'd like to note a few things and feel free to respond either here or on my talk page, whichever your prefer.
] is up for AFD... again.


The ]. As a previous participant in a AFD discussion for this article, you are encouraged to contribute to ongoing consensus of whether or not this article meets Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion.--] (]) 02:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
* Although we might have gotten off on the wrong foot, I don't see any need to potentially hold a grudge. I didn't agree with your actions previously, but won't hold it against you personally. I would hope that this could be reciprocated as well
* Considering the fact that I happen to be a new wikipedian who has really had to learn the ropes quite quickly here due to my involvement at ] I would appreciate that rather you take more of a mentoring role as opposed to, what I perceive, to be an attempt to drum up some kind of conspiracy.
* I have learned many lessons so far here, including some wikipedia policies and definitely the politics here. Again, a pro-active constructive approach would be much appreciated if I deviate from standard protocol here
* It's not uncommon for someone wanting a fresh start hence the name change which also reflects a new found maturity or at the very least, a new perspective on how to contribute effectively here at Misplaced Pages. That's the one and only reason I changed my name and I went through all the proper protocols to do so
* It seems as though a ] has some serious issues and a fixation on me, and I understand, based on a quick look at the histories, that you're on friendly terms. That need not mean that you and I cannot collaborate together nor strike up a similar ].


== A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies ==
Anyways, I wanted to nip this in the bud and I do appreciate your comments and feedback so we can move forward in our mutual goal of increasing the quality and experience here at Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 00:17, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


Hi. I would like to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change. If interested, please get in touch via my talkpage or email me ] (]) 18:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
== Attack page ==


== ] nomination of ] ==
I guess someone is being a bit two-faced with you. See ]. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 01:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
]An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for ]. The nominated article is ]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also ] and "]").


Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to ]. Please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
:I proudly confess to his accusation that I am a ], but... yeah. I don't care myself (it only makes ''him'' look bad), but if you want to report it to ] it would likely get deleted as an attack page. ] (]) 01:45, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the ] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
::I'd rather save my energy for the racists and other low lifes. CorticoSpinal is just an anti-science, POV-pusher with an inappropriate attack page. He'll just get indefinitely blocked again soon. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 02:45, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


'''Please note:''' This is an automatic notification by a ]. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --] (]) 01:24, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
== GSTS, Again ==


== ] of ] ==
I think qualifies as breaking your "final warning" to the KKK-loving Neo-Nazi. Calling me a fascist is over the top. And I didn't even have to bait him. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 23:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
]] has been nominated for merging with ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Tfmnotice--> --] (]) 18:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


== ] of ] ==
:Yeah, I saw, but I just got back last night from an overseas trip and have some things to straighten out at home (I do have a life outside Misplaced Pages, despite appearances). Indef block likely to follow. ] (]) 00:21, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
]] has been nominated for merging with ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Tfmnotice--> --] (]) 18:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


== ] of ] ==
Hi Raymond, I was thinking of issuing OrangeMarlin with some sort of warning for the following edits, but thought that may seem inflammatory coming from me, given our past interactions. Could you please check out these diffs, and let me know what you think?
]] has been nominated for merging with ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Tfmnotice--> --] (]) 18:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
He is clearly and deliberately disrupting the talkpage of ] with a seemingly anti-Christian agenda. I don't personally like to use the term 'POV', it seems incivil but OrangeMarlin is continually throwing it around at anyone who dares disagree with him. This was the basis of my fascist comment, as it seems somewhat hypocritical of OrangeMarlin to be so sensitive about his Judaism, yet so willing to dismiss another's religion, this being Christianity. --] (]) 00:45, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
:Note, the problem is also often in his edit summaries, perhaps he needs reminded that civility does indeed cross over onto Edit summaries, not just talkspace. --] (]) 00:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
::Another example of this incivility on OrangeMarlin's behalf is evident here, first there was a civil request from an editor for OM to read ], , followed by OM dismissing this as a personal attack here . I feel that OrangeMarlin is a well educated individual who I am sure could be very valuable to the encyclopedia, but something needs done about his continual incivility, it is creating a rather hostile environment. --] (]) 00:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


==On CERUMENTRIC==
unCIVIL huh? You know that accusing people of spurious CIVIL and NPA violations is itself a sanctionable offense. Good grief.--] (]) 01:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Mr. Arritt! Acknowledging that you have point for deleting the entry for ], a synth-rock band from Manila due to lack of notability in 2007, would you at least reconsider removing it from the deleted entries list and allowing a new entry to be written for the band? I realize 6,000+ Google results are not enough to justify notability (which I also think is subjective), I have been following the Manila music scene in the Philippines for more than 15 years and could attest that CERUMENTRIC has been a notable act in the Manila indie music scene, has been nominated twice in 2009 and 2010 for Best Dance/Electronic Act in the Asia Pacific Voice Independent Music Awards in Malaysia, and is noted by some music bloggers in Brunei and Japan as one of the leading proponents in the emerging South East Asian electronica movement. I realize my reasons are biased as a local fan of the band, but I will try my best to write a more or less objective entry based on Misplaced Pages's standards. Thank you so much for your time. :) --Canfried Moses Fibakar (] <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 07:15, 6 September 2010 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Assuming that comment is directed at me, I am quite aware of the consequences and am hoping that someone neutral (in OM's eyes) will tell OrangeMarlin that very fact so he ceases his constant barrage of spurious accusations. --] (]) 01:06, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
::I'm personally unsure what you hoped to accomplish with going back to OM's page. In fact I'm unsure about what you hope to accomplish at Misplaced Pages in general. Outside of a few vandalism reverts, I've seen little activity from you that is helping improve the encyclopedia. I've seen provocative user boxes made, provocative edits to KKK related articles, and wikilawyering and personal attacks. Apparently you take issue with use of the term neo-Nazi. OM you shouldn't call him a neo-Nazi. Do you deny that you are if not a KKK member than at least a KKK supporter? With affiliations with that group, isn't racist a statement of fact rather than a personal attack? ]] 01:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Yawn. Thanks AniMate, I was wondering the same thing, but I don't want to bait the SPA. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 01:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


==Notice of change==
== Expert advice? ==
Hello. You are receiving this message because of a to the ] that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the ]. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through ]. Thank you. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
== Nomination for merging of ] ==
]] has been ] with ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Tfmnotice--> ] (]) 16:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
== Nomination for merging of ] ==
]] has been ] with ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Tfmnotice--> —&nbsp;''''']'''&nbsp;<small>]</small>'' 16:31, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]


The file ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
Hi, I've been looking at your expert withdrawal page and put an idea in there<!-- to organize pro-reality experts and academics in a wikiproject (a good name would be Civil Academy or something like that, teaching new editors how not to give science a bad name while still performing necessary tasks being one way of influencing the "hearts and minds" of wiki in favour of pro-reality standpoints), if nothing else because a strike usually doesn't work unless strongly unionized, but there could be more benefits -->, not that I think I can figure out something in half an hour that noone else has figured out before, I believe it has, I just don't know if it's been actually tried. I am a newbie editor, but I feel loath at giving of my way way way too limited time to this project if it runs like it does now, so that's why I'm interested in helping fix things.--] (]) 21:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
<blockquote>Unused low-quality image</blockquote>


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
== Actionable intelligence ==


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
So if calling someone a "POV-pusher" is "actionable" incivility, then isn't calling someone "uncivil" also itself an uncivil act? Aren't group denigrations (e.g. ) uncivil? I think the ] of this recent trend is to declare that it is uncivil to call anyone uncivil. I think I'm going to start enforcing actionable breaches of ] now. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 17:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 17:49, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
: My brain hurts. ] (]) 17:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
== ] of ] ==
]


The file ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
::No pain, no gain. Or as the Marines say, "Pain is weakness leaving the body." I like your sockfarm, by the way. :) ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 17:18, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
<blockquote>Unused low-quality image</blockquote>


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
== Hi RA, could you take a look. . . ==


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
Hi Raymond, I was wondering if you could check over a recent I made. I just want to make sure I didn't miss anything. If you have a bit of time I'd appreciate it. Thanks, ] (]) 17:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 17:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
:Wow, lots of background there. I'll try to have a look this evening when I have more time to go into it. ] (]) 17:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


]
::Sorry 'bout that, I guess there is a lot to read. If you don't get time to look at the overall merits, that's ok. OTOH, if you notice anything technically lacking on my part (I've left a notice with a link to an unblock request template, which I think is all I have to do) with regard to following the blocking protocol -that's something I would want to know, and would be a little quicker to check (I hope). ] (]) 17:40, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


== Reply == == R.I.P. ==


Rest in peace. Your wisdom, clarity, and common sense (as reflected in your essays) are sorely missed in these times. ] (]) 00:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
My apologies, it was poorly worded. I meant that we need to watch that the editor doesn't break 3RR again, as he's done so in the past and has ignored warnings to stop. ''']]''' 03:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 05:14, 7 December 2024

File:Meatpuppet.gif This user is a member of RSMT - the "rational skepticism meatpuppet team".
Archiving icon
Archives
2007 2008

Care of the cow brings good fortune.

The awesome BULLSTAR is hereby awarded for facing down so much BS and yet managing to not lose your self control.--MONGO 08:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)






Greenwich December 2024 31 Tuesday 03:28 UTC


Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Sorry I wasn't here to take your call. You can leave a message after the tone.

Tone

Hello Raymond. You have taken a previous interest in the "Arnoldo Aleman" page. Over a year ago you were involved in locking out my username "Spartanad" for edit warring. I had it coming that time but wonder if you might take another look at the page? I am trying to keep bias out of the "Corruption" section and am being twinkled and now personally attacked. In fact, the user "Brusegadi" is apparently trying to identify me personally, although unsuccessfully to this point. It seems to be personal, especially on the "El Pacto" portion of the discussion page. Would you please take a look and let me know your thoughts? Spartanad (talk) 04:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

WTF?

So what the heck is going on around here these days? Do you think it's a full moon, or bad wheat, or folie à plusieurs? Or is the matrix starting to degrade? Even by Misplaced Pages's standards, this place is going nuts. MastCell  16:33, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, so it's not just me. I've been wondering if it's a perverse form of spring fever. Raymond Arritt (talk) 16:38, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Global warming. It's been above 100 here for the past 7 days, and it's only freaking May. I wonder if shoreline property on Hudson Bay will be a good investment. OrangeMarlin 16:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I just can't wait till the Northwest Passage opens up. I'm tired of people giving global warming a bad rap. How cool will it be to be able to travel by boat from Nova Scotia to Alaska yearround? MastCell  16:22, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Very cool. I was thinking how many seals and whales will live longer and more productive lives because polar bears will be extinct. People are so damn short-sighted about the melting of the ice caps.OrangeMarlin 16:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, now that I see your new userbox, it all makes sense: "May is mental health awareness month". MastCell  17:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I think Dick Nixon kicked that off while Veep. &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149; 19:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Interesting... not Thomas Eagleton? :) MastCell  22:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Natural selection is good, is it not? Tparameter (talk) 23:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
"Good"? That all depends on whether you're being selected for or selected against, n'est-ce pas? MastCell  05:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Cla68

This happens when things get out of hand. Sadly, Cla68 is quite a good editor. I actually gave a little help out to one of his articles on an obscure Japanese medical officer from WWII. But it appears if you oppose his POV on anything else, he goes on attack. Apparently, you disagree with his global warming POV. Oh well. OrangeMarlin 16:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Didn't you know that Cla68, because of his featured content in a narrow area, is the final arbiter here? He is above Jimbo and Arbcomm. He is a Very Important Wikipedian and has often been quoted in the press.--Filll (talk | wpc) 16:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Y'know, I was thinking as I was driving in to work today, I don't need this stuff. I'll wait and see what happens, but if he opens an arbcom case I'm outta here. Life is too short to waste time proving that I'm not made of wood. Raymond Arritt (talk) 16:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Aw hell, I servived a arbykom kase .. di'n't her me nun.  ;) &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149; 19:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Definite and indefinite

"Raymond Arrit is taking wikibreak"? You must be Russian guy, as do you not use indefinite article in sentence. :) Hey, the good news is that every period of lunacy is followed by a period of reactive sanity. (The bad news is that the reverse is also true). Methinks we're overdue. I can't run the global warming walled garden by myself; I'm too busy pushing the fringe POV that HIV causes AIDS. Have a good holiday weekend and keep up the good work. :) MastCell  00:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Only sockpuppet being Russian guy. Raymond Arritt (talk) 00:12, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
I like the excerpt on Boris' userpage. A bit reminiscent of Zoshchenko. MastCell  22:49, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
That's brilliant. My sock is boringly predictable and has no witty excerpts. Clearly, I buy my socks at Wal-Mart, and you buy yours somewhere far more artsy. Perhaps you knit them yourself at Burning Man? KillerChihuahua 05:46, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Allopathic

Hi Raymond, I read your post about Commonname, and I read the page itself. Thanks for pointing this out. I agree with you, in general, I'm not sure which article you feel is misnamed, or even if you are suggesting that. The point you made about an osteopathic grad being referred to as an allopath is interesting. The problem is that I've never heard any physician referred to as an allopath. But I have read many sources which discuss an "osteopathic" graduate entering an "allopathic residency." Such a person is said to have "allopathic training." It wouldn't really make sense to say they had "MD" training, since they are still a DO. It would make sense to say they had "ACGME" training, since this is the body that accredits "allopathic" programs. Of course, this is all very confusing. But I do think it needs to be explained, not avoided. That's really the core of my point. Explain the terminology that is used, as neutrally as possible, using reliable sources. This language is used by the people and the organizations that govern this process in the US. The National Residency Matching Program uses the term on its main page, and in all its reports on residents, matching, physicians workforce issues, etc. . As does the AMA, the AOA, etc, etc. Thoughts? Bryan Hopping 19:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Xiutwel and 9/11

Hey Raymond arritt, check out the section entitled hello on my talk page and inform me at User:Redmarkviolinist/Talkpage2 on how I dealt with the questions that Xiutwel asked me. Cheers, ṜέđṃάяķvюĨїήīṣŢ Review Me! 18:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Ray-ray has left the building, unfortunately. MastCell  18:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

advice?

concerning this?

I'm not sure he's around much any more. OrangeMarlin 23:52, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey Raymond

I see you're not around, and don't know what precipitated your departure, but in case you occasionally stop by and read here, I wanted to say I hope you'll be back - you were always a pleasure to work with, and we need people like you on the project. Drop me an email any time. All best Tvoz/talk 19:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

One can hope. I am not so sure it is so likely, knowing what happened.--Filll (talk | wpc) 19:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Raymond arritt/Sandbox

I've emptied your sandbox for now, since it's getting picked up by template transclusion bots. Feel free to revert once you're back if you still need it. –xeno (talk) 13:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

NLP

I am proposing deletion of the entire set of articles on Neurolinguistic programming. See Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Neuro-linguistic programming. NLP is an extraordinary pseudoscience that is so successful at disguising itself as real science that it had many people fooled for a long time. I'm amazed this has gone on for so long but enough is enough. I would appreciate any help on this as there is bound to be a bitter fight - there are a number of commercial interests involved and there is evidence of some inside support in Misplaced Pages itself. I have a separate file of information if you are interested, but for obvious reasons that cannot go on-wiki. Best. Peter Damian (talk) 10:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

New policy proposal and draft help

Misplaced Pages:Scientific standards

I have drafted a new proposal and would like help in clarifying, adjusting, adapting, and improving it. It is based on five years of work here at Misplaced Pages (not always the prettiest, I might add). I think it summarizes the opinions of a great majority of editors as to how to handle scientific situations. This proposal serves as a nexus between WP:NPOV and WP:RS for cases where we are dealing with observable reality. It is needed because there are a lot of editors who don't seem to understand what entails best-practices when writing a reliable reference work about observable reality. I don't pretend that this version is perfect, and would appreciate any and all additions, suggestions people may have for getting to some well-regarded scientific standards.

Note that these standards would apply only when discussing matters directly related to observable reality. These standards are inspired in part by WP:SPOV but avoid some of the major pitfalls of that particular proposal. In particular, the idea that SPOV even exists is a real problem. However, I think it is undeniable that we should have some standards for writing about scientific topics.

See also WP:SCI for another failed proposal that dovetails with this one. I hope this particular proposal is more in-line with the hole I see in policy/guidelines for dealing with these situations.

ScienceApologist (talk) 20:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Interesting in theory but unworkable. First, it will never become policy because there are too many people here who are bent on promoting nonsense, and too many influential administrators and editors who sympathize with them. Second, Misplaced Pages's core content policies such as WP:WEIGHT, WP:NOR, and the like can be disregarded with impunity. What would be the benefit of having yet another toothless content policy on the books? 129.186.187.11 (talk) 17:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Attacks in the article Robert M. Carter

Please do not make personal attacks as you did at Robert M. Carter. Misplaced Pages has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Misplaced Pages and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images, especially those in violation of our Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons policy, will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Thank you. Northwestgnome (talk) 19:12, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Raymond hasn't edited that article in the last 8 months, and this account has been entirely inactive for the past 3 months. What in the name of Odin's Beard are you talking about? MastCell  20:23, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Public understanding of climate models

I saw you wondering what public understanding is somewhere else, and thought I'd share this which is the best article I've seen and the source of most of what I know about the topic. I suspect that most people know that or less. Probably much less in some cases. If you have any recommended reading that's accessible on a pop-sci level I'd be interested. Mishlai (talk) 02:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages's Expert Peer Review process (or lack of such) for Science related articles

Hi - I posted the section with the same name on my talk page. Could you take part in discussion ? Thanks ARP Apovolot (talk) 19:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

User: Shotwell suggested (on my talk page) "I would endorse a WP:EXPERTADVICE page that outlined the wikipedia policies and goals for researchers in a way that enticed them to edit here in an appropriate fashion. Perhaps a well-maintained list of expert editors with institutional affiliation would facilitate this sort of highly informal review process. I don't think anyone would object to a well-maintained list of highly-qualified researchers with institutional affiliation (but then again, everyone seems to object to something)."

We could start with that if you would agree ... - could you help to push his idea through Misplaced Pages bureaucracy ?

In my view people nominated as "expert reviewers" should be willing not to hide under the veil of anonymity. They should be able to demonstrate some level of the verifiable accomplishment / recognition in the domain of professional science . BTW, I do not see any reason why the anonymity of editors on Misplaced Pages is considered to be a "good thing". Above is my general opinion, so please don't take my statement personally. There is obviously a choice given for everyone in Misplaced Pages either to act "in open" or to hide behind meaningless assumed pseudonym and I accept this situation. BTW, I do understand current Misplaced Pages concept that in order to produce good Misplaced Pages science article, one does not need to be a professional scientist ... - that is fine with me ... But I propose to have (at least optionally) ability to review/qualify such article by the professional scientist. Cheers, Apovolot (talk) 15:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Afd of Mucoid plaque

Mucoid plaque is up for AFD... again.

The latest discussion is here. As a previous participant in a AFD discussion for this article, you are encouraged to contribute to ongoing consensus of whether or not this article meets Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion.--ZayZayEM (talk) 02:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies

Hi. I would like to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change. If interested, please get in touch via my talkpage or email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 18:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Misplaced Pages:Notability and "What Misplaced Pages is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming (3rd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:24, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Gblock

Template:Gblock has been nominated for merging with Template:Uw-block1. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. --Bsherr (talk) 18:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:GblockIP

Template:GblockIP has been nominated for merging with Template:Uw-ablock. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. --Bsherr (talk) 18:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Gblock-i

Template:Gblock-i has been nominated for merging with Template:Uw-block3. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. --Bsherr (talk) 18:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

On CERUMENTRIC

Hi Mr. Arritt! Acknowledging that you have point for deleting the entry for CERUMENTRIC, a synth-rock band from Manila due to lack of notability in 2007, would you at least reconsider removing it from the deleted entries list and allowing a new entry to be written for the band? I realize 6,000+ Google results are not enough to justify notability (which I also think is subjective), I have been following the Manila music scene in the Philippines for more than 15 years and could attest that CERUMENTRIC has been a notable act in the Manila indie music scene, has been nominated twice in 2009 and 2010 for Best Dance/Electronic Act in the Asia Pacific Voice Independent Music Awards in Malaysia, and is noted by some music bloggers in Brunei and Japan as one of the leading proponents in the emerging South East Asian electronica movement. I realize my reasons are biased as a local fan of the band, but I will try my best to write a more or less objective entry based on Misplaced Pages's standards. Thank you so much for your time. :) --Canfried Moses Fibakar (User_talk:Canfried —Preceding undated comment added 07:15, 6 September 2010 (UTC).

Notice of change

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you. MBisanz 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:IPlocation

Template:IPlocation has been nominated for merging with Template:Shared IP. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 16:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Coi-stern

Template:Coi-stern has been nominated for merging with Template:Uw-coi. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. — Newslinger talk 16:31, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:No democrat.png

Notice

The file File:No democrat.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused low-quality image

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. B (talk) 17:49, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:No republican.png

Notice

The file File:No republican.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused low-quality image

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. B (talk) 17:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

R.I.P.

Rest in peace. Your wisdom, clarity, and common sense (as reflected in your essays) are sorely missed in these times. Emdosis (talk) 00:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Category: