| Revision as of 18:56, 14 February 2010 editKeepcalmandcarryon (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,732 edits →Edit warring: rm inappropriate template← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 23:59, 23 November 2023 edit undoDonner60 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers235,911 edits not around since June 2016 | ||
| (133 intermediate revisions by 39 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{not around|3=12 June 2016}} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | ||
| Line 8: | Line 10: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi,<br> | |||
| == Shocking == | |||
| You appear to be eligible to vote in the current ]. The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages ]. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to ] and submit your choices on ]. For the Election committee, ] (]) 13:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692203726 --> | |||
| I'm honestly flabbergasted that the sole flounder would show up to support obvious psuedoscience. ] (]) 21:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :He's not as bad as Rupert Sheldrake, in my opinion, but he is clearly fringe (and has worse PR than Sheldrake). That article is a mess, and Jimbo hasn't helped. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">] <small>]</small></span> 21:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks for the support, but I've got to knuckle under on this one. Obviously, our COI policy has limited meaning if editors must come to a consensus with the subject of the article and one or more of his ardent supporters before editing. But just as obviously, I'm not Jimbo Wales; if he's OK with de Grey and Ben Best gatekeeping this and the woolly flock of related articles (and ''de facto'' encouraging them to do so), then I must be, too. ] (]) 21:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::: The sole flounder might have the magic founder bit, but that dosen't mean his right. On the contrary, I'd argue. ] (]) 21:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| Chin up, all. He probably just received a message or two and did what he thought best in light of the BLP imbroglios that keep threatening to take down this site. (It's only a matter of time before WMF is named a party in a defamation suit if they don't solve their BLP issue). It's not the first time a foot has been thrust into a mouth in areas like this. We all make mistakes. Best thing to do is move forward and avoid histrionics. ] (]) 22:17, 9 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Whittemore Peterson Institute == | |||
| K, re your , the study details four tests. We have four options: ignore this fact; state 'four tests' without naming them; "name" them with a few word description drawn from the content; can go into a whole screed of technical detail that will confuse the lay reader, ... The debate on the discussion page should be about which we should adopt and what that content is. The Antibody test was difficult to summarise, so if you have read the earlier part of the section you should have realised that these are Mikowits own summary, not mine. | |||
| I incidentally agree with your analysis, to the extent that tests B-D are based directly or indirectly on animal infected MLV antibodies. However the paper does state that "All of these Abs detected the human VP62 XMRV strain grown in human Raji, LNCaP and Sup-T1 cells"; that is they show a response to a broader class of MLV viruses which includes XMRV. So what we strictly have is 68/101 test positive for on test A. (Of the remaining 33 patients) we have 19,10,9 test positive for a gammaretrovirus class which includes XMRV out of 30:12:18 CFS patients and no control positives. Your wording (without the explanation that these tests are positive to XMRV) would imply that these test would only detect MRV and not XMRV. We both know that antibodies can usually show this type of broad class response, but the general reader would not, especially if you conveniently omit to mention the XMRV validation. | |||
| Another point is that you summarise the paper as "two patient samples resulted in ''apparent'' infection of primary T-cells." . However, the report doesn't include the word apparent, so this is a WP:OR value judgement on your part. | |||
| If you want to go into this level of detail on this paper, then perhaps we should also discuss another paper on a follow-up study that was completed, written up and submitted 53 days after this one? I could pick a lot better holes in that :-) -- ] (]) 02:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| I see that we've cross posted on this one. I have decided to raise an issue on ] re your actions since your post of the 8th. Accusing both me and Mikowits of "slapdash and scientifically inaccurate" content was really the tipping point. -- ] (]) 07:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ===Please find consensus=== | |||
| Please stop edit warring at ] until a consensus is reached. Maybe opening a ] would help. Thanks. ] (]) 10:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Hi == | |||
| Hope to see you back soon! <span style="font-family:Papyrus">] <small>]</small></span> 22:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Kary Mullis == | |||
| Maybe the guy has said somewhere that 'the human factor is baloney', but he hasn't done so in the source provided to back up the text (sourced to a video with sidebar of text). I watched it twice now, he doesn't mention the A in AGW at all in that video, yes, he says (as much as) 'global warming theory is wrong', but he doesn't mention the human factor in that source. Please revert your revert of me, or if I have missed it again, provide a timestamp. Thanks.] (]) 00:43, 14 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :It's difficult to tell who you are with all of the IP-hopping. Please use your old account or create a new one. ] (]) 00:51, 14 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::"with all the ip hopping" ??? LMFAO - '''two''' IPs are sooooooooooooo difficult to deal with eh? You are now just obfuscating your deceitful editing. The repeated insertion of false information is considered vandalism, don't put that lie back in again. Thanks.] (]) 07:10, 14 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::It isn't vandalism. It's edit warring and should stop. Please use the talk page. ] (]) 14:10, 14 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == ]: Voting now open! == | |||
| == Wikiquette alerts discussion with which you may have been involved. == | |||
| {{Ivmbox|Hello, Keepcalmandcarryon. Voting in the ''']''' is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016. | |||
| Hello, ] This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ] (]) 03:06, 14 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. | |||
| == Good enough == | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review ] and submit your choices on ''']'''. ] (]) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
| Sometimes you just have to go for good enough ]. ] (]) 15:35, 14 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| |Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}} | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52 bot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52_bot/spamlist/30&oldid=750612131 --> | |||
Latest revision as of 23:59, 23 November 2023
 | This user may have left Misplaced Pages. Keepcalmandcarryon has not edited Misplaced Pages since 12 June 2016. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Keepcalmandcarryon. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Categories: