Revision as of 20:13, 22 May 2011 editKiefer.Wolfowitz (talk | contribs)39,688 edits →Insult of User:Keepscases: You should be ashamed of your misconduct, and I wish that you soon properly feel shame and remorse, after which you should apologize to Keepscases.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:32, 1 November 2023 edit undoJonesey95 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Mass message senders, Template editors373,946 editsm Fix Linter errors. | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
] | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} | |||
|maxarchivesize = 32K | |||
|counter = 10 | |||
|minthreadsleft = 1 | |||
|minthreadstoarchive = 0 | |||
|algo = old(11d) | |||
|archive = User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz/Archive %(counter)d | |||
}} | |||
{{archives|auto=yes}} | {{archives|auto=yes}} | ||
{{Signpost-subscription}} | {{Signpost-subscription}} | ||
{{Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/RfA Report|style="float: |
{{Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/RfA Report|style="float:right: clear:left;"}} | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
== Afghan documents leak and child prostitution == | |||
{{talkback|Talk:Afghan War documents leak}} | |||
==David Eppstein== | |||
== Request for Comment == | |||
Kiefer, | |||
] | |||
Yes, I slapped a notability-tag on the article on ] immediately after ] removed a reference to a new article on cellular automata questioning notability, for the simple reason that when I looked who was the person that has claimed that the reference I was adding was not notable enough turns out to lack of notability to have such a Misplaced Pages article. From the one hand Eppstein supports his own notability by directing the course of his own Misplaced Pages article when involves himself in the discussion page of his artice even when the notability issue has been recurrently raised by several other people with no consequence at hotel (perhaps because people like you immediately reverse any legitimate step to take a further step and let people to decide before basically banning me and writing me on my talk page). I am not driven by vengeance but by consistency and fairness not only to me but to all people that have better resum'es but not even have a Misplaced Pages article nor such a relevant and long article. If ] thinks that mentioning a paper published in a respectable journal which is extremely relevant to a section of a Misplaced Pages article about the topic but his Misplaced Pages article is completely biased towards the subjective judgment then I think there is a conflict of interest. But a second conflict of interest us that ] has repeatedly said in several places that Wolfram's classes are ill defined (which he clearly has managed to state it in the article section even though this is not a generalized concern but his own opinion). Yet this new published paper shows that an objective measure is capable of classifying cellular automata exactly into Wolfram's 4 classes with no human intervention, which ] claims is not notable enough (unlike the journal opinion). ] reaction only a couple of hours later to revert my contribution and the article of Misplaced Pages suggesting he is a great scientist is at least shocking. | |||
<blockquote> | |||
"Assuredly we bring not innocence into the world, we bring impurity much rather: that which purifies us is triall, and triall is by what is contrary." | |||
:], '']'' </blockquote> | |||
=== RFC/U discussion concerning you (Kiefer.Wolfowitz) === | |||
Hello, ]. Please be aware that a ] has been filed concerning your conduct on Misplaced Pages. The RFC entry is located at ], where you may want to participate. As requested, I will now ask a sitting arb, and one of your prefered administrators to confirm whether there is a basis for this RfC. ] <span style="font-weight:bold;">·</span> (]) 18:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC) <!-- Template:ConductDiscussion --> | |||
:My suggestion was that you ask somebody with greater ability and experience to draft an RfC that would focus on a few behavioral changes, for me (as you should do for any other person in an RfC). Your credibility would be greater if you were being conservative in your paraphrasing, rather than distorting ]'s comment about my contempt for Busky's book. Have you bothered to read the pages I flagged as poor scholarship yet? | |||
I don't consider that ] is more notable than thousands, if not more, of other professors and researchers with at least or much better CVs. Written reviews are not a criterion according to Misplaced Pages notability neither contributing to a book chapter. Just to mention an example, I just looked for a professor that has written about 7 books, published more than a hundred articles, yet has no Misplaced Pages article, and even if he someday had it will certainly not be that cared which is clearly an indication imho of ] intervention in his own Misplaced Pages article or people very close to him. To support this claim, you can see how many people that have contributed to ]'s article has been suspected of suck puppetry and have been banned of Misplaced Pages, yet their 'contributions' remain in ]'s article as completely objective, and any attempt to raise the concern seems to trigger what you are doing now. | |||
:I find it humorous that you, who could not even be bothered to source properly the trivial bacon festival, are rapping my knuckles like a school marm about my acknowledgment that I had reused content ("canibalizing"), which I have acknowledged doing in many articles with edit-summaries. Of course, I can do better and perhaps I have slipped a few times. | |||
:Even if you have a respected Wikipedian involved with your RfC, I shall certainly have no time for it until December, as I noted before. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 18:58, 8 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
::Kiefer, I have endorsed the basis of the RfC, so let's have no more of this "someone with greater ability" crap please. I suggest you get over there and respond to what's being raised - as I said previously, in my experience it never comes out well for the editor who attempts to ignore the issue. ] (]) 20:29, 8 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::Elen, if I want your opinion, I shall ask for it. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> | |||
=== Your contributions at RfC === | |||
I just deplore the attitude of authority of these kind of users when it comes to the notability of a published paper of someone else but not so when it comes to expose themselves. Simply the length and content of his article does not correspond to his place. | |||
Thank you for your participation in the discussion - I am hopeful that this can be brought to an amicable solution. I note that you have made a comment in the "Outside View" section - this section is for editors who are not a party to the dispute. For your convenience, I have moved your comments in their entirity into the response section . You may wish to edit the header as it just says "Moved from Outside View section" at the moment. --] (]) 09:29, 9 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
In summary, I think ] has a serious double conflict of interest when it comes to suggest or perform editions that validate or refute his beliefs, including what he thinks about cellular automata and of himself. | |||
:Your movement was fine, although it does not preserve the ''soi disant'', ''le soi c'est one autre'', and a certain ''soup de jour'' qualities of the original. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 08:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
Sincerely, | |||
] (]) |
::Surely it's soup du jour :) :) ] perhaps? --] (]) 11:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC) | ||
:::That was an excellent guess! The cuisine is Roman. I ''am'' in a "secure, undisclosed location", but I do hear the Mediterranean peacefully loosening its rope of sands. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 14:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
=== "" === | |||
:Thanks for your reply. I believe that your comments should be made available to the other editors of the article on Eppstein, and so I would prefer to reply to your comments there. Please copy your comment and my reply there. | |||
:Like many editors who are notable in the real world, Eppstein monitors his biographical article. For several years, he has restricted his editing there to commenting on the talk page, fully in compliance with with WP's COI policy (and also BLP policy), imho (but I haven't checked the history). I don't have the time or inclination to argue about comparative status of academics. It is sufficient that David Eppstein's article be brief and list his main accomplishments. | |||
:Please don't make personal attacks on other editors. David is not controlling anything. | |||
:You should ask for a second opinion at the computer science or mathematics projects, if you think that you are being treated unfairly by me (or by the other editor who reverted your edit). | |||
:As I have said twice, and now a third time, :-) , it usually suffices to find a published reliable article that supports your summary of the paper (that you previously inserted). In any event, you need to get consensus from the other editors on the talk page, when you add material to an article: The burden is on the editor adding new material, when there is a dispute. Would you please acknowledge that you understand this policy? | |||
:Thanks again for replying directly and honestly. | |||
:Sincerely, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 21:49, 18 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
On same team in general, but I advise you to chill out. Roll with the punches, just a little. And jab in spots, not always. Even for humor, it can be more effective. Like when Jerry advised George on not overplaying the jokes. | |||
== ] == | |||
P.s. Yeah, the kids are kids. And trapped in Dunning Kruger (similar to Rumsfeldian unknown unknown). But give them a break. Broadcast at intervals, not continuuous wave. | |||
''']''', which you created, has been ]. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ] (]) 06:11, 12 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
P.s.s. Peace brah...and don't let the turkeys get you down. | |||
:Thanks for the information. You are right that there is ambiguity about the categories, but I believe that a renaming of the article was a first priority. Thanks again. Best regards, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 16:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
P.s.s.s. That Ossfrob (or whatever his name is) is right about Shapley Lema-thereom. It is still too mathy. You CAN keep the essential content and make it better. | |||
== ''The Signpost'': 16 May 2011 == | |||
P.s.s.s.s. BEADWINDOW and all that... \ | |||
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> | |||
:For the record, the IP editor who refuses a signature above is ]. <span style="font-family:Lucida Calligraphy;">]<span style="color:#0095c6;">of</span>]</span> 04:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2011-05-16}} | |||
</div><!--Volume 7, Issue 20--> | |||
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''']''' · ] · ] · ] (]) 01:31, 17 May 2011 (UTC)</div> | |||
<!-- EdwardsBot 0141 --> | |||
=== Motions: A quotation from our intrepid reporter === | |||
<blockquote> | |||
"A was filed last week. In lieu of opening a case at this time, the Committee passed the following motions: | |||
::Reading about the ] and reviewing ]'s '']'' were both enjoyable. I believe that the other allusion is to ]'s or ]'s "secure undisclosed location" (often ridiculed on ]'s ]), where the Vice President secured himself after the 9/11 attacks. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 14:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
;1RR, civility probation, and moratorium | |||
*All discussions on the subject of ]es in article titles discussion are subject to civility and 1RR restrictions, broadly construed. | |||
*Administrators are urged to be proactive in monitoring and assertive in keeping debate civil. Actions requiring clarification can be raised with the Committee on ]. | |||
*A moratorium has also been imposed on article title changes concerning hyphen/endash exchange; the only edits allowed will be to create a redirect to the ''existing'' article title until the resolution of the debate below. | |||
:::The Rumsfeldian reference was to ], I believe. ] (]) 00:15, 19 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
;Discussion for obtaining consensus | |||
::::That makes more sense! Thanks! <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 08:33, 19 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
*With the goal of obtaining consensus, interested parties have been instructed to spend their time determining the structure of a discussion on en dashes in article titles. This may be the continuation of a current discussion or commencement anew. After May 2011, six weeks will be provided for gathering consensus on the issue. The discussion should be of sufficient structure to allow easy quantification of consensus rather than a large amount of poorly-framed debate. | |||
=== ] === | |||
;Consequence of insufficient resolution | |||
*If a determination isn't realised by mid-July, the Committee warns that a case will be opened and conduct violations will be dealt with severely." | |||
</blockquote> | |||
===Comment=== | |||
To laugh or to sigh, that is the question. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 21:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
The self imposed interaction ban was, IMHO, only on a discussion basis on your talk and mine I believe. I feel I can add value at the above. Are you in agreement that posting there does not contradict my interaction ban? If not then I will not comment there. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">] : ] </span></small> 22:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
==Resp== | |||
:Hi Pedro! | |||
:Thanks for asking. I shall try to email you privately. | |||
:Sincerely, | |||
:<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 22:30, 10 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
::Thank you for your email. After fully reading the RFC, I have decided that I'm unlikely to add value. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">] : ] </span></small> 22:20, 11 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::Hi Pedro, | |||
You said.. "I don't understand your edits. | |||
:::I thought you wrote a very classy request. I am sorry that I did not see your reply earlier, and acknowledge it immediately. | |||
:::If you change your mind please feel free to comment at the RfC, or if you want to email me suggestions for improving my editing. | |||
:::You have a lot more experience on WP than I do. If you change your mind about the interaction ban, which certainly did serve a purpose after some derailed conversations, then please email me or write here. | |||
:::I appreciate your taking the time to read the RfC and to think about contributing. I shall remember your example of aiming for value-added comments. | |||
:::Best regards, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 17:38, 12 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
=== Consider the alternatives === | |||
The first chapter of <s>TSP</s>''Testing Statistical Hypotheses'' explains that complete families are undominated, which is a concept from game theory/optimization. Have you looked at Lehmann? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:26, 19 May 2011 (UTC)" Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:JA(000)Davidson" | |||
], helps learners distinguish between right and wrong action.<ref name="Prado"> | |||
at ] | |||
</ref>).]] | |||
I wrote this some months ago. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 17:39, 12 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
::I could use my world-renowned telepathy to guess that this refers to ]. Does "TSP" correspond to E. L., Lehmann; Romano, Joseph P. (2005). Testing statistical hypotheses? ... which would be TSH. No I don't have access to that. But are they talking about the same thing? ] seems to have moved on from discussing general types of completeness in statistics to being (only) about something called a "complete statistic" ... not a "complete sufficent statistic". But Lehmann might be talking about a "complete class of tests" which has an entirely different meaning, and its definition (according to a dictionary) seems to be based on this "dominance" idea. But as it stands in the article, the definition of a complete statistic involves nothing to do with optimality. ] (]) 10:12, 19 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
==== Infantilization ==== | |||
:::I left the message within an hour of your editing the article on completeness. | |||
:::''Testing Statistical Hypotheses'' is the standard source on Neyman-Pearson-Wald statistics, and is a good source on completeness. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 19:00, 20 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
We agree that positive reinforcement is wonderful. However, negative reinforcement is also beneficial. Read ]'s Presidential Address to the American Psychological Association, "": | |||
=="The decision is yours"== | |||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
Reward everything—gold and garbage—alike. The tradition of '''exaggerated tenderness''' in psychiatry and psychology '''reflects our “therapeutic attitude” and contrasts with that of scholars in fields like philosophy or law, where a dumb argument is called a dumb argument, and he who makes a dumb argument can expect to be slapped down by his peers.''' Nobody ever gives anybody negative reinforcement in a psychiatric case conference. (Try it once—you will be heard with ].) The most inane remark is received with ] as part of the ] ]. Consequently the educational function, for either staff or students, is prevented from getting off the ground. Any psychologist should know that part of the process of training or educating is to administer differential reinforcement for good versus bad, effective versus ineffective, correct versus incorrect behaviors. '''If all behavior is rewarded by friendly attention and nobody is ever non-reinforced (let alone punished!) for talking foolishly, it is unlikely that significant educational growth will take place.''' (pp. 228-229) | |||
I am leaving soon, and you will forgive me if I speak bluntly. The universe grows smaller every day, and ] Now, this does not mean giving up any freedom except the freedom to act irresponsibly. Your ancestors knew this when they made laws to govern themselves and hired policemen to enforce them. We of the other planets have long accepted this principle. We have an organization for the mutual protection of all planets and for the complete elimination of aggression. The test of any such higher authority is, of course, the police force that supports it. For our policemen, we created a race of ]. Their function is to patrol the planets—in space ships like this one—and preserve the peace. In matters of aggression, we have given them absolute power over us; this power can not be revoked. At the first sign of violence, ]. The result is that we live in peace, without arms or armies, secure in the knowledge that we are free from aggression and war—free to pursue more profitable enterprises. Now, we do not pretend to have achieved perfection, but we do have a system, and it works. I came here to give you these facts. It is no concern of ours how you run your own planet. But if you threaten to extend your violence, this Earth of yours will be reduced to a burned-out cinder. Your choice is simple: Join us and live in peace, or pursue your present course and face obliteration. We shall be waiting for your answer; the decision rests with you. | |||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
... | |||
—] | |||
<br /> | |||
The obvious educational question is, how does it happen that this bright, conscientious, well-motivated, social-service-oriented premed psychology major with a 3.80 average doesn’t know the most elementary things about psychotic depression, such as its diagnostic indicators, its statistical suicide risk, or the time phase in the natural history of the illness which presents the greatest risk of suicide? The answer, brethren, is very simple: Some of '''those who are “teaching” and “supervising” him either don’t know these things themselves or don’t think it is important for him to know them'''. '''This hapless student is''' '''at the educational mercy of a crew that is so unscholarly, antiscientific, “groupy-groupy,” and “touchy-feely” that they have almost no concern for facts, statistics, ... or the work of the intellect generally'''. (p. 280) | |||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
(Emboldening and links added) | |||
{{The Day the Earth Stood Still|state=expanded}} | |||
Spare the rod and spoil the child, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 14:12, 10 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
:Many, many years ago I attended case conferences during my psychology degree, and I was absolutely gob-smacked by the social worker pseudo-science bullshit on display even then. ] ] 22:57, 10 October 2011 (UTC)' | |||
::(ec) Very true. If all feedback is the same, there is no way of differentiating the useful (important) from useless (trivial or misleading). ] (]) 23:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::p.s. I like your style! ] (]) 23:06, 10 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::: <nowiki>:)</nowiki> (KW) | |||
:::It's something that now seems to be deep in the American psyche. I attended an IT training course a few years ago led by an American, and within two hours of the week-long course I was writhing at her habitual "Thank you for that very interesting question" response to almost everything she was asked, no matter how stupid or inane. Whoever it was said that there are no stupid questions is an ass. ] ] 23:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::: I know parents of fairly bright kids who get really frustrated by the teachers of their children uncritically praising substandard work, on the grounds that their work is much better than that of many of the children in the class. The idea of equality, taken too far, does not challenge and stretch everyone according to their ability, and so becomes fundamentally unfair. '']'' 23:38, 10 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::::There was a fairly well-publicised case here in the UK of a football match between two junior teams being stopped at half-time because one team was losing 9–0, and it was considered improper that they should be asked to take the field again for the second half, and perhaps suffer further humiliation. Or perhaps fight back and win the game 10–9, we'll never know. But there's definitely an uncritical view that all efforts are equal, when they patently are not. There are winners and losers in life, and that's a lesson kids need to learn. ] ] 00:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::::::I endorse ]'s ''The Schools We Need, and Why We Don't Have Them'', which traces the disasters of American schools (particularly the systems of schools of eduction) to American romanticism, which viewed everybody as having a spark of divinity, like a narcissistic version of the Quaker religion (without the "leveling" or emphasis on good will and integrity). | |||
:::::::After the publication of an English grammar of Sanskrit c. 1848, there was a fascination with Hinduism and Buddhism; probably German romanticism benefited from an awareness of Hindu and Buddhist influences on Christianity even earlier, and various types of pantheism and spiritualism. Not only romantic novelists but also scientists did research on spiritualism, "energy fields", "ghosts", etc. This BS animates much of American culture, from schools of education to ''Star Wars''. | |||
:::::::Another good book is by ], ''House of Cards: Psychology and Therapy Built on Myth''. Dawes emphasizes the importance of time on task for learning, especially homework, and criticizes the absurd and anti-scientific cult of "self esteem" in the U.S., particularly in "education". Dawes has been a professor at the magnificent Carnegie Mellon University. | |||
:::::::His CMU colleagues ], ], and a third have written criticisms of education-school BS, claiming to be based on "cognitive psychology". Misplaced Pages's own ] has claimed that "research has shown" that short homework lessons are best, etc. Simon, Anderson, et alia have explained that many of these claims contradict the core findings of experimental psychology. (One of the disasters of Swedish social-democracy is that ] and her successors have imported the anti-intellectual U.S. system into a country that already suffered from conformity and ].) | |||
:::::::I agree with the above expressed revulsion about the neglect of gifted children in many schools. It is nearly child abuse that some students never are challenged and so helped to learn time-management and study skills until they get to university. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 07:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
===]=== | |||
{| | |||
| | |||
:Welund him be wurman wræces cunnade, | |||
:anhydig eorlearfoþa dreag, | |||
:hæfde him to gesiþþe sorge ond longaþ, | |||
:wintercealde wræce; wean oft onfond, | |||
:siþþan hine Niðhad onnede legde, | |||
:swoncre seonobendeon syllan monn. | |||
:Þæs ofereode,þisses swa mæg!<ref> | |||
</ref> | |||
| | |||
:Welund tasted misery among snakes. | |||
:The stout-hearted hero endured troubles | |||
:had sorrow and longing as his companions | |||
:cruelty cold as winter - he often found woe | |||
:Once Nithad laid restraints on him, | |||
:supple sinew-bonds on the better man. | |||
:That went by; so can this.<ref></ref> | |||
|} | |||
<references/> | |||
] smith ], portrayed on the ].]] | |||
=== ] === | |||
I have been having a ''deja vu'' experience all over again, but now I understand why: I recognize that I have been transgressing ], which is familiar to anybody who has lived for a half year in Sweden or Norway: | |||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
] has ten rules: | |||
:Barnhardt: One thing, Mr. Klaatu: suppose this group should reject your proposals. What is the alternative? | |||
:# Don't think you're anything special. | |||
:Klaatu: I'm afraid there is no alternative. In such a case, the planet Earth would have to be... eliminated | |||
:# Don't think you're as good as us. | |||
:Barnhardt: Such power exists? | |||
: |
:# Don't think you're smarter than us. | ||
:# Don't convince yourself that you're better than us. | |||
</blockquote> | |||
:# Don't think you know more than us. | |||
=== Your request at Drmies's RfA === | |||
:# Don't think you are more important than us. | |||
:# Don't think you are good at anything. | |||
:# Don't laugh at us. | |||
:# Don't think anyone cares about you. | |||
:# Don't think you can teach us anything. | |||
An eleventh rule is: | |||
::11. ]. | |||
<br /> | |||
Those who transgress this unwritten 'law' are regarded with suspicion and some hostility, as it goes against communal desire in the town to preserve harmony, social stability and uniformity. | |||
</blockquote> | |||
] has never been adopted officially in Nordic countries, although it is enforced daily ]. Why should Misplaced Pages be different? <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 15:09, 18 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
==='']''=== | |||
], like the goal of every '']'', is reformation not punishment.]] | |||
From ] by Malleus et alia: | |||
<blockquote> | |||
; RfC ''n.'' | |||
: (''editor conduct'') A place to bring anyone you have a longstanding grudge against. There, they'll be subject to countless attacks by '']'' (also known as "outside views") and generally be tortured until they agree to submit to your every whim. This is, of course, unless they are a popular editor, in which case the RfC will be dismissed as bad faith and you blocked indefinitely for some purportedly unrelated reason. | |||
: (''content dispute'') A place where editors who know absolutely nothing about the subject chime in in an attempt to destroy an '']'' further.</blockquote> | |||
== Positive reinforcement == | |||
=== A beer for you === | |||
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thankyou for participating in my request for adminship. Now I've got lots of extra buttons to try and avoid pressing by mistake... ] (]) 15:04, 14 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
:Hi <s>RedRose64</s> Redrose64! | |||
:It was my pleasure to vote for you! :) | |||
:Feel free to block me any time! ;) | |||
:Cheers, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 15:08, 14 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
=== Some falafel for you! === | |||
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanks for making Misplaced Pages a better place to be. Enjoy! ]™] 15:54, 16 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
<small><small>Please reply on Pinkstrawberry02's ]. If for some reason you cannot, please leave them a {{template|talkback}} and reply on your own talk page. Also, don't forget to sign their ]. Thanks for your attention!</small></small> | |||
:Thank you! ]? <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 16:58, 16 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
==== Thank You...and You're Welcome! ==== | |||
Hey, thanks for the Baba Ghanoush! Try a new food every day - it was delicious! And you are certainly welcome for the falafel, I'm glad you enjoyed it. And no, I haven't. I've actually thought of myself as not good enough to do it - maybe I should start small. Thanks again! ]™] 18:13, 16 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
===Я поздравляю вас!=== | |||
: ("Я поздравляю вас!" is Russian for "I congratulate you". <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 10:25, 19 October 2011 (UTC)) | |||
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" | |||
|rowspan="2" valign="top" | ] | |||
|rowspan="2" | | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Workers' Barnstar''' | |||
|- | |||
|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | This user has shown great editing skills in improving articles related to ] or ]. | |||
|} | |||
<!-- http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz&action=edit§ion=16 --> | |||
* ...For your ongoing efforts to eliminate tendentious distortions from histories and biographies relating to 1970s American radicalism. ] (]) 16:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
], 16 December 1935]] | |||
You might want to take it to either an individual admin or to ANI. (Sorry I'm not touching this beyond this post.) <font face="Lucida Calligraphy">]<font color="#0095c6">of</font>]</font> 23:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
] poster by ]: "Hurry to join ]!"]] | |||
:I understand, and I appreciate your writing me: It shows character, given the unfair treatment of you. | |||
:I would like for the community to stand up for an isolated person, whose behavior they generally dislike, when that person is insulted because of religion---or politics, etc. I would hope that Snottywong would revise his/her statement, or that the community would take appropriate action. We have 100 people watching the RfA page, and so I feel there is no need for me to take further action. | |||
:I believe that "hate" is far too strong, but I believe that it couldn't hurt to remove the "invisible pink unicorn" badge from officially being part of the atheism project. It may be appropriate to move the other atheism-related (often amusing, and sometimes offensive) userboxes to a secondary page. | |||
:I am sorry for rambling, somewhat. I am tired and going to bed. | |||
:I admire your work in the last days! Best regards, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 23:14, 21 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
::Well, somebody closed the thread at the RfA, a reasonable course. However, I don't like the idea of the community approving a religious insult or leaving a personal already feeling that WP is a hostile place to receive an insult without comment. So I followed your advice and noted the insult at ANI. I hope that SnottyWong or another will redact the insult. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 00:02, 22 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::I should stay out of this altogether, probably. But for the record: I have no problem with the pink unicorn. I also have no problem with the Lady if indeed she is an atheist and were to support it on her blog and at her place of employment--I have never seen her disparage one Misplaced Pages edit or another for religious reasons. I also don't have a problem with Keepscases's non-atheism (I don't want to presume what they are--it's none of my business); since they don't have a lot of edits in articles, I can't tell if their opinion interferes with our various guidelines. Also for the record: SnottyWong shouldn't have said what they said, of course, though I understand where it's coming from (I live in the South). Finally, I have nothing but respect for those who quote Milton. Thanks Kiefer. I hope you have pleasant dreams--maybe you'll wake up and recite Book 13 of ''Paradise Lost'' to your amanuensis. ] (]) 00:38, 22 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
::::I have had my share of people telling me that I'm going to Hell too, and I dislike many displays of public belief, particularly by politicians! I understand the feeling of liberation atheists are feeling now in the USA (like homosexuals coming out of the closet) too. But now, I'm off to bed, unless I feel that there is an injustice to be righted! ;) <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 00:45, 22 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
:Dear Brother Carrite! | |||
=== Insult of ]=== | |||
:Thank you very much! | |||
{{anchor| Sadly... }} {{anchor|Sadly}} | |||
...it seems that most of the time AN/I only sees a block or ban as the answer to everything. I find that there are far too many people there who seem to carry a somewhat vindictive attitude, when we're supposed to be editing this Misplaced Pages collaboratively, carrying the water for one another, so to speak. I agree with you that attacks should be avoided, but I have to disagree that a ban is the only or the best option for dealing with insults. I've seen many times, simply reminding people what the discussion is about is enough to direct the conversation back on track. My two pence. -- ] (]) 01:51, 22 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
:My efforts would be so much easier if I had not reacted to the anti-] of previous versions with sometimes POV anti-anti-anticommunism. (However, the arch of the universe does incline towards NPOV justice, which is democratic and therefore anti-communist.) | |||
:I agree with you in most cases. However, please review the treatment of KS at the RfA and his talk page. It is most important to protect unpopular people against personal attacks based on race/religion/politics, because this is when the community shows that it will enforce rules even when inconvenient. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 01:55, 22 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
Thank you for your work recently on ]. One of the pleasures of writing about Kemble or ] is writing about personalities, rather than cookie-cuts. | |||
::I agree with you on that. I haven't looked at the underlying situation in depth, so hopefully any resolution will end up being fair. -- ] (]) 02:55, 22 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
:In solidarity, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 17:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::Kiefer, you're acting like Keepscases was being dragged into the streets and beaten by the mob. SW generally dismissed Christianity as a 2,000 year old fairy-tail- that is inappropriate in a collaborative environment, as is calling someone an idiot, but neither were worth the drama your ANI thread generated. An indefinite block is a grossly draconian punishment for such a minor incident. No matter ''who'' said what to ''who'', there was absolutely ''nothing'' that required administrator intervention. People who break laws are punished. People who violate Misplaced Pages's rules must certainly ''aren't'' and we only use blocks as a last resort. I'm sure you were acting in good faith, but in the future, please be sure if creating more and more drama at ANI is really necessary. '']'' <sup>]</sup> 07:07, 22 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::::Hi Swarm, | |||
:::::Personal attacks based on group characteristics damage the community more than personal attacks based more on behavior or individual idiosyncrasies, and such personal attacks are mentioned specifically by WP:NPA. | |||
:::::A 24 hour block may have been more appropriate, I agree. I explicitly suggested that Snottywong be unblocked immediately upon apologizing on his userpage, so the purpose of an indefinite block was more to signal the no-tolerance for such personal attacks rather than to remove Snottywong from WP. | |||
:::::I had been trying to reach out to Keepscases, because I disagreed with the content and tone of his/her statements, when Snottywong intervened with a personal attack on Keepscases. Because I had implicitly criticized Keepscases, I felt a special obligation to defend him/her. In general, the community rather than the victim should take responsibility for correct action. | |||
:::::I had hoped that the RfA crowd would roundly criticize Snottywong for the insult, just as the community had rightly criticized Keepscases for incivility towards the LadyofShalott (and inappropriate comments on WikiProject Atheism). Only after the discussion was closed at RfA did I go to ANI---and this was only the second case I raised there (the first being the aforementioned red-baiting, Jew-hating attack, which met with a block). Sincerely, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 14:13, 22 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
::::::Perhaps now you've learned your lesson about the type and severity of concerns which should be taken to ANI. ] <sup><small>]</small></sup> 19:26, 22 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Snottywong, please stop trolling. | |||
:::::::You should be ashamed of your misconduct, and I wish that you soon properly feel shame and remorse, after which you should apologize to Keepscases. | |||
:::::::I have already removed your clichéed trouts. Please don't post here again, unless you need to notify me of an ANI or otherwise are required by WP. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 19:57, 22 May 2011 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 15:32, 1 November 2023
Archives |
no archives yet (create) |
24 December 2024 |
|
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful) |
Afghan documents leak and child prostitution
Hello, Kiefer.Wolfowitz. You have new messages at Talk:Afghan War documents leak.You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Request for Comment
"Assuredly we bring not innocence into the world, we bring impurity much rather: that which purifies us is triall, and triall is by what is contrary."
RFC/U discussion concerning you (Kiefer.Wolfowitz)
Hello, Kiefer.Wolfowitz. Please be aware that a user conduct request for comment has been filed concerning your conduct on Misplaced Pages. The RFC entry is located at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Kiefer.Wolfowitz, where you may want to participate. As requested, I will now ask a sitting arb, and one of your prefered administrators to confirm whether there is a basis for this RfC. Worm · (talk) 18:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- My suggestion was that you ask somebody with greater ability and experience to draft an RfC that would focus on a few behavioral changes, for me (as you should do for any other person in an RfC). Your credibility would be greater if you were being conservative in your paraphrasing, rather than distorting User:Carrite's comment about my contempt for Busky's book. Have you bothered to read the pages I flagged as poor scholarship yet?
- I find it humorous that you, who could not even be bothered to source properly the trivial bacon festival, are rapping my knuckles like a school marm about my acknowledgment that I had reused content ("canibalizing"), which I have acknowledged doing in many articles with edit-summaries. Of course, I can do better and perhaps I have slipped a few times.
- Even if you have a respected Wikipedian involved with your RfC, I shall certainly have no time for it until December, as I noted before. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 18:58, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Kiefer, I have endorsed the basis of the RfC, so let's have no more of this "someone with greater ability" crap please. I suggest you get over there and respond to what's being raised - as I said previously, in my experience it never comes out well for the editor who attempts to ignore the issue. Elen of the Roads (talk) 20:29, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Your contributions at RfC
Thank you for your participation in the discussion - I am hopeful that this can be brought to an amicable solution. I note that you have made a comment in the "Outside View" section - this section is for editors who are not a party to the dispute. For your convenience, I have moved your comments in their entirity into the response section here. You may wish to edit the header as it just says "Moved from Outside View section" at the moment. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 09:29, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Your movement was fine, although it does not preserve the soi disant, le soi c'est one autre, and a certain soup de jour qualities of the original. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Surely it's soup du jour :) :) Minestrone perhaps? --Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- That was an excellent guess! The cuisine is Roman. I am in a "secure, undisclosed location", but I do hear the Mediterranean peacefully loosening its rope of sands. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Surely it's soup du jour :) :) Minestrone perhaps? --Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
"Lighten up, Francis"
On same team in general, but I advise you to chill out. Roll with the punches, just a little. And jab in spots, not always. Even for humor, it can be more effective. Like when Jerry advised George on not overplaying the jokes.
P.s. Yeah, the kids are kids. And trapped in Dunning Kruger (similar to Rumsfeldian unknown unknown). But give them a break. Broadcast at intervals, not continuuous wave.
P.s.s. Peace brah...and don't let the turkeys get you down.
P.s.s.s. That Ossfrob (or whatever his name is) is right about Shapley Lema-thereom. It is still too mathy. You CAN keep the essential content and make it better.
P.s.s.s.s. BEADWINDOW and all that... \
- For the record, the IP editor who refuses a signature above is User:71.246.147.40. LadyofShalott 04:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Reading about the Dunning–Kruger effect and reviewing Bill Murray's Stripes were both enjoyable. I believe that the other allusion is to Donald Rumsfeld's or Dick Cheney's "secure undisclosed location" (often ridiculed on Harry Shearer's Le Show), where the Vice President secured himself after the 9/11 attacks. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- The Rumsfeldian reference was to this, I believe. 28bytes (talk) 00:15, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
- That makes more sense! Thanks! Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:33, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
- The Rumsfeldian reference was to this, I believe. 28bytes (talk) 00:15, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Kiefer.Wolfowitz
The self imposed interaction ban was, IMHO, only on a discussion basis on your talk and mine I believe. I feel I can add value at the above. Are you in agreement that posting there does not contradict my interaction ban? If not then I will not comment there. Pedro : Chat 22:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Pedro!
- Thanks for asking. I shall try to email you privately.
- Sincerely,
- Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:30, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you for your email. After fully reading the RFC, I have decided that I'm unlikely to add value. Pedro : Chat 22:20, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Pedro,
- I thought you wrote a very classy request. I am sorry that I did not see your reply earlier, and acknowledge it immediately.
- If you change your mind please feel free to comment at the RfC, or if you want to email me suggestions for improving my editing.
- You have a lot more experience on WP than I do. If you change your mind about the interaction ban, which certainly did serve a purpose after some derailed conversations, then please email me or write here.
- I appreciate your taking the time to read the RfC and to think about contributing. I shall remember your example of aiming for value-added comments.
- Best regards, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:38, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Consider the alternatives
I wrote this some months ago. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:39, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Infantilization
We agree that positive reinforcement is wonderful. However, negative reinforcement is also beneficial. Read Paul Meehl's Presidential Address to the American Psychological Association, "Why I do not attend case conferences":
Reward everything—gold and garbage—alike. The tradition of exaggerated tenderness in psychiatry and psychology reflects our “therapeutic attitude” and contrasts with that of scholars in fields like philosophy or law, where a dumb argument is called a dumb argument, and he who makes a dumb argument can expect to be slapped down by his peers. Nobody ever gives anybody negative reinforcement in a psychiatric case conference. (Try it once—you will be heard with horror and disbelief.) The most inane remark is received with joy and open arms as part of the groupthink process. Consequently the educational function, for either staff or students, is prevented from getting off the ground. Any psychologist should know that part of the process of training or educating is to administer differential reinforcement for good versus bad, effective versus ineffective, correct versus incorrect behaviors. If all behavior is rewarded by friendly attention and nobody is ever non-reinforced (let alone punished!) for talking foolishly, it is unlikely that significant educational growth will take place. (pp. 228-229)
...
The obvious educational question is, how does it happen that this bright, conscientious, well-motivated, social-service-oriented premed psychology major with a 3.80 average doesn’t know the most elementary things about psychotic depression, such as its diagnostic indicators, its statistical suicide risk, or the time phase in the natural history of the illness which presents the greatest risk of suicide? The answer, brethren, is very simple: Some of those who are “teaching” and “supervising” him either don’t know these things themselves or don’t think it is important for him to know them. This hapless student is at the educational mercy of a crew that is so unscholarly, antiscientific, “groupy-groupy,” and “touchy-feely” that they have almost no concern for facts, statistics, ... or the work of the intellect generally. (p. 280)
(Emboldening and links added)
Spare the rod and spoil the child, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:12, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
- Many, many years ago I attended case conferences during my psychology degree, and I was absolutely gob-smacked by the social worker pseudo-science bullshit on display even then. Malleus Fatuorum 22:57, 10 October 2011 (UTC)'
- (ec) Very true. If all feedback is the same, there is no way of differentiating the useful (important) from useless (trivial or misleading). Manny may (talk) 23:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- p.s. I like your style! Manny may (talk) 23:06, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- :) (KW)
- It's something that now seems to be deep in the American psyche. I attended an IT training course a few years ago led by an American, and within two hours of the week-long course I was writhing at her habitual "Thank you for that very interesting question" response to almost everything she was asked, no matter how stupid or inane. Whoever it was said that there are no stupid questions is an ass. Malleus Fatuorum 23:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I know parents of fairly bright kids who get really frustrated by the teachers of their children uncritically praising substandard work, on the grounds that their work is much better than that of many of the children in the class. The idea of equality, taken too far, does not challenge and stretch everyone according to their ability, and so becomes fundamentally unfair. Geometry guy 23:38, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- There was a fairly well-publicised case here in the UK of a football match between two junior teams being stopped at half-time because one team was losing 9–0, and it was considered improper that they should be asked to take the field again for the second half, and perhaps suffer further humiliation. Or perhaps fight back and win the game 10–9, we'll never know. But there's definitely an uncritical view that all efforts are equal, when they patently are not. There are winners and losers in life, and that's a lesson kids need to learn. Malleus Fatuorum 00:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- I know parents of fairly bright kids who get really frustrated by the teachers of their children uncritically praising substandard work, on the grounds that their work is much better than that of many of the children in the class. The idea of equality, taken too far, does not challenge and stretch everyone according to their ability, and so becomes fundamentally unfair. Geometry guy 23:38, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- p.s. I like your style! Manny may (talk) 23:06, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- (ec) Very true. If all feedback is the same, there is no way of differentiating the useful (important) from useless (trivial or misleading). Manny may (talk) 23:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I endorse E. D. Hirsch's The Schools We Need, and Why We Don't Have Them, which traces the disasters of American schools (particularly the systems of schools of eduction) to American romanticism, which viewed everybody as having a spark of divinity, like a narcissistic version of the Quaker religion (without the "leveling" or emphasis on good will and integrity).
- After the publication of an English grammar of Sanskrit c. 1848, there was a fascination with Hinduism and Buddhism; probably German romanticism benefited from an awareness of Hindu and Buddhist influences on Christianity even earlier, and various types of pantheism and spiritualism. Not only romantic novelists but also scientists did research on spiritualism, "energy fields", "ghosts", etc. This BS animates much of American culture, from schools of education to Star Wars.
- Another good book is by Robyn Dawes, House of Cards: Psychology and Therapy Built on Myth. Dawes emphasizes the importance of time on task for learning, especially homework, and criticizes the absurd and anti-scientific cult of "self esteem" in the U.S., particularly in "education". Dawes has been a professor at the magnificent Carnegie Mellon University.
- His CMU colleagues Herb Simon, John R. Anderson, and a third have written criticisms of education-school BS, claiming to be based on "cognitive psychology". Misplaced Pages's own mathematics education has claimed that "research has shown" that short homework lessons are best, etc. Simon, Anderson, et alia have explained that many of these claims contradict the core findings of experimental psychology. (One of the disasters of Swedish social-democracy is that Alva Myrdal and her successors have imported the anti-intellectual U.S. system into a country that already suffered from conformity and leveling egalitarianism.)
- I agree with the above expressed revulsion about the neglect of gifted children in many schools. It is nearly child abuse that some students never are challenged and so helped to learn time-management and study skills until they get to university. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 07:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Welund
|
|
- Page of the painting at Prado Museum
- Deor at the site of the society Ða Engliscan Gesiþas.
- Modern English translation by Steve Pollington, Published in Wiðowinde 100, at the site of the society Ða Engliscan Gesiþas.
Unwritten Misplaced Pages Policy
I have been having a deja vu experience all over again, but now I understand why: I recognize that I have been transgressing Jante Law, which is familiar to anybody who has lived for a half year in Sweden or Norway:
Jantelagen has ten rules:
- Don't think you're anything special.
- Don't think you're as good as us.
- Don't think you're smarter than us.
- Don't convince yourself that you're better than us.
- Don't think you know more than us.
- Don't think you are more important than us.
- Don't think you are good at anything.
- Don't laugh at us.
- Don't think anyone cares about you.
- Don't think you can teach us anything.
An eleventh rule is:
Those who transgress this unwritten 'law' are regarded with suspicion and some hostility, as it goes against communal desire in the town to preserve harmony, social stability and uniformity.
Jante Law has never been adopted officially in Nordic countries, although it is enforced daily with gusto. Why should Misplaced Pages be different? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:09, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Give It to Me Baby
From WikiSpeak by Malleus et alia:
- RfC n.
- (editor conduct) A place to bring anyone you have a longstanding grudge against. There, they'll be subject to countless attacks by uninvolved editors (also known as "outside views") and generally be tortured until they agree to submit to your every whim. This is, of course, unless they are a popular editor, in which case the RfC will be dismissed as bad faith and you blocked indefinitely for some purportedly unrelated reason.
- (content dispute) A place where editors who know absolutely nothing about the subject chime in in an attempt to destroy an article further.
Positive reinforcement
A beer for you
Thankyou for participating in my request for adminship. Now I've got lots of extra buttons to try and avoid pressing by mistake... Redrose64 (talk) 15:04, 14 October 2011 (UTC) |
- Hi
RedRose64Redrose64! - It was my pleasure to vote for you! :)
- Feel free to block me any time! ;)
- Cheers, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:08, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Some falafel for you!
Thanks for making Misplaced Pages a better place to be. Enjoy! Pinkstrawberry02™ 15:54, 16 October 2011 (UTC) |
Please reply on Pinkstrawberry02's talk page. If for some reason you cannot, please leave them a {{talkback}} and reply on your own talk page. Also, don't forget to sign their guestbook. Thanks for your attention!
- Thank you! Have you considered joining the administrator corps? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 16:58, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank You...and You're Welcome!
Hey, thanks for the Baba Ghanoush! Try a new food every day - it was delicious! And you are certainly welcome for the falafel, I'm glad you enjoyed it. And no, I haven't. I've actually thought of myself as not good enough to do it - maybe I should start small. Thanks again! Pinkstrawberry02™ 18:13, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Я поздравляю вас!
- ("Я поздравляю вас!" is Russian for "I congratulate you". Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:25, 19 October 2011 (UTC))
The Workers' Barnstar | ||
This user has shown great editing skills in improving articles related to Communism or Socialism. |
- ...For your ongoing efforts to eliminate tendentious distortions from histories and biographies relating to 1970s American radicalism. Carrite (talk) 16:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- Dear Brother Carrite!
- Thank you very much!
- My efforts would be so much easier if I had not reacted to the anti-anticommunism of previous versions with sometimes POV anti-anti-anticommunism. (However, the arch of the universe does incline towards NPOV justice, which is democratic and therefore anti-communist.)
Thank you for your work recently on Penn Kemble. One of the pleasures of writing about Kemble or Tom Kahn is writing about personalities, rather than cookie-cuts.
- In solidarity, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)