Misplaced Pages

User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz/Archive: 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.
< User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:58, 8 October 2011 editKiefer.Wolfowitz (talk | contribs)39,688 edits RFC/U discussion concerning you (Kiefer.Wolfowitz): Good luck← 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. 
(85 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
] ]
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}}
|maxarchivesize = 32K
|counter = 19
|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}}
Line 18: Line 9:
{{talkback|Talk:Afghan War documents leak}} {{talkback|Talk:Afghan War documents leak}}


== Request for Comment ==
== More politics: Libertarian, social-democratic, and neoconservative ==


]
=== Re:Advice ===
<blockquote>
I would be hiding under the guise of age if I did that, Kiefer. I don't want to make my fellow contributors think I am someone I am not. I am forthright and honest about my age, and I feel it would be a lie for me not to be. I think being open and honesty about it is the right thing to do. :)
"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."
::And for the record, the page is vastly smaller than a previous revision I will not list here. I will likely seek help on removing these previous revisions (I was not aware it could be done aside from vandalism), but I do not think my page is overly controversial. Thank you for you're advice, I greatly appreciate it. :) '''] ]]''' 22:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
:], '']'' </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. ]&nbsp;<span style="font-weight:bold;">&middot;</span>&#32;(]) 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?
:::Hi Toa!
: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.
:::Thank you for writing me, and thinking about my suggestion. I think the people at the page will be quite helpful if you would ask for anything.
: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)
:::I hope that you are enjoying contributing to Misplaced Pages, and that you shall continue.
::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)
:::Best regards, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 22:20, 26 September 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 ===
===="]": A ], or ]?====
]'s forehand smash was lethal to his academic left, in his polemic against ] and ], "The poverty of theory". However, his backhand was feeble against his right, particularly in the objectionable "Open Letter to ]"<!-- , which originated the phrase "Natopolitan", rightly criticized by ] (whose politics were as intelligent as his philosophy was dumb) -->: in it, Thompson compared himself to a ] ''(pictured)''.]]
Thanks... by the way, that comment section on lib. socialism has been dead for about a year. :P '''] ]]''' 22:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


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)
:“To leave error unrefuted is to encourage intellectual immorality.“ Karl Marx (quoted in 'The Poverty Of Theory' by E. P. Thompson.).
: ;) <small>(My friend Toa describes himself as a conservative with libertarian leanings, so I tease him a bit ....)</small>
:<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 22:41, 26 September 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. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 08:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
::Ah, I see... Anyway, thanks for the advice and I look forward to work with you at some point in the future. I'll also be sending a request, so thanks. :) '''] ]]''' 22:50, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
::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)


=== "" ===
=== DSOC ===


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.
Hey K-Wolf, I'm not understanding the "Self-Pubished Sources" flag on DSOC. Did you run that up or did somebody else? Is it in reference to using Harrington's memoir? ] (]) 01:23, 30 September 2011 (UTC)


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.
:Hej Tim!
:I think that I added that; perhaps a ] tag would have been more accurate. (An autobiography, no matter how accurate, should be supplemented with secondary reliable sources, if possible; two reliable sources are mandatory for possibly contentious statements made about living persons.) I cannot find anything false in Michael's memoirs, and therefore I did not remove or challenge any statement citing it as false.
:I mentioned previously that I have tried to find sources to supplement my references to Horowitz's memoir of Kahn, even though she carefully documents everything (or states that it is her personal opinion based on 30 years of friendship).
:Cheers, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 05:39, 30 September 2011 (UTC)


P.s.s. Peace brah...and don't let the turkeys get you down.
::Thanks for fixing the tag. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 11:41, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
=== Action: Gertrude Hillelfarb ===


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.
Don't miss the action at ]. ] (]) 20:24, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
:Not my favorite author, but the author of one of my favorite review sentences, about ]'s '']''---namely, "This is not a serious book". It may have been written in '']'', which I received as a joke after I had sent '']'' to a friend. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 20:49, 30 September 2011 (UTC)


P.s.s.s.s. BEADWINDOW and all that... \
== The Signpost: ] ==
: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)


::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)
=== ''The Signpost'': 26 September 2011 ===


:::The Rumsfeldian reference was to ], I believe. ] (]) 00:15, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
::::That makes more sense! Thanks! <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 08:33, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2011-09-26}}
</div><!--Volume 7, Issue 39-->
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''']''' &middot; ] &middot; ] &middot; ] (]) 01:40, 27 September 2011 (UTC)</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0174 -->
===I tried ...===


=== ] ===
I copy-edited the Signpost article about Misplaced Pages Foundation's vetoing of a trial.


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)
====My version====
:Hi Pedro!
;'''Foundation overrules community consensus on autoconfirmation trial'''
: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,
In a thread, English Misplaced Pages editors disagreed with MediaWiki sysadmins over a proposed ]. The ] in a widely publicised Request for Comment. However, the proposal was blocked by Wikimedia Foundation staffers and developers.
:::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 proposed trial would changed the mechanics of article-creation, in which currently a large portion of articles created by new editors were swiftly deleted and their authors reprimanded. The proposal was to barr new editors from creating articles and rather to funnel them through the ] and ] processes. The proposal aimed to reduce pressure on ], to irritate fewer new editors, and to improve the quality of new articles.
], 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)
The proposal was vetoed by Wikimedia Foundation Deputy Director Erik Möller, who said, "Creating a restriction of this type is a strong a statement of exclusion, not inclusion." "It will confuse and deter good-faith editors." Möller agreed that Misplaced Pages needed to improve the atmosphere for new editors and to provide a "friendly, welcoming and understandable experience". He suggested three steps:
# simplifying the actual workflow of new article creation and reducing instruction creep
# experimenting with alternative models to provide new users with safe spaces for new article development
# connecting new users with experienced mentors faster.
Möller and the developers suggested that English Misplaced Pages address the problems facing new editors by working with ] project at MediaWiki.


==== Infantilization ====
Their suggestion was criticized by English Misplaced Pages editors. The initiator of the bug report ] wrote that "ArticleCreationWorkflow doesn't discuss any real solutions to the problem, so I will not be contributing there". The Foundation staff were criticized for unilateralism, incivility and a patronising tone, by some editors.


We agree that positive reinforcement is wonderful. However, negative reinforcement is also beneficial. Read ]'s Presidential Address to the American Psychological Association, "":
Volunteer developer and long-standing English Wikipedian ] wrote,
<blockquote>
{{bquote|There *is* a separation of *cultures* here, and it's something that an awful lot of members of the wiki communities do not appreciate. The developers and (separately) the sysadmins/WMF form their own separate communities with their own goals and practices; and those goals and practices, while closely matching those of enwiki or whereverwiki, do not
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)
necessarily precisely align. There is nothing unrealistic, or wrong, with enwiki having goals which are very slightly different from those of the WMF as a whole, or for their requests to not be ones that the Foundation feels bests fits with their own strategies.}}
<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>
(Emboldening and links added)


Spare the rod and spoil the child, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 14:12, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
After the veto by the Wikimedia Foundaton, English Wikipedian and developer ] made a list of incidents where Wikimedia systems administrators ].
====Status quo ante belles artes====
! ;)


: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)'
Where was George W. Bush when he is needed to copy edit?!!!!?!!! ;) <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 00:02, 1 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)


; '''Foundation overrules community consensus on autoconfirmation trial'''
], which was seen as striking an unwelcome exclusionary stance.]]


:::::::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).
In a heated altercation between English Misplaced Pages community members and MediaWiki sysadmins in the course of a thread, a proposed ], which ] in a widely publicised Request for Comment, was thwarted by Wikimedia Foundation staffers and developers. The trial had been motivated by the perceived ineffectiveness of prevailing article creation mechanics, whereby a large portion of articles created by new editors were swiftly deleted and their authors reprimanded. By barring new editors from creating articles and funnelling them through the ] and ] processes, it was hoped to ease pressure on ], alienate fewer new contributors and ensure a higher quality of new articles. After reticence to implement the trial from sysadmins and an intemperate reaction, Wikimedia Foundation Deputy Director Erik Möller after acknowledging the stated intentions of the initiative, put the boot down firmly on the petitioners' hopes:
:::::::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''.
{{bquote|However, we believe that creating a restriction of this type is a strong a statement of exclusion, not inclusion, and that it will confuse and deter good faith editors. Instead of trying to address many different issues by means of a simple but potentially highly problematic permission change, we believe that in order to create a friendly, welcoming and understandable experience for new editors, we need to apply an iterative, multi-prong approach, including but not limited to:
* simplifying the actual workflow of new article creation and reducing instruction creep
* experimenting with alternative models to provide new users with safe spaces for new article development
* connecting new users with experienced mentors faster.}}
Möller and the developers attempted to redirect efforts to the ] project at MediaWiki in the face of strong resistance from the English Misplaced Pages community members, with the initiator of the bug report ] commenting "ArticleCreationWorkflow doesn't discuss any real solutions to the problem, so I will not be contributing there". Charges of unilateralism, incivility and a patronising tone were levelled at Foundation staff as it became evident the report would not result in implementation. Volunteer developer and long-standing English Wikipedian ] attempted to bridge the growing divide with an entreaty for perspective:
{{bquote|On the other hand, there *is* a separation of *cultures* here, and it's something that an awful lot of members of the wiki communities do not appreciate. The developers and (separately) the sysadmins/WMF form their own separate communities with their own goals and practices; and those goals and practices, while closely matching those of enwiki or whereverwiki, do not
necessarily precisely align. There is nothing unrealistic, or wrong, with enwiki having goals which are very slightly different from those of the WMF as a whole, or for their requests to not be ones that the Foundation feels bests fits with their own strategies.}}


:::::::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.
In response to the incident, English Wikipedian and developer ] assembled at Meta a list of instances of Wikimedia systems administrators ]. The firm insistence of the Wikimedia Foundation to pursue its own vision of sustaining and developing the Wikimedia projects in defiance if necessary of the wishes of the core community of its flagship project – and the chief source of its funding – is an indicator of how far the organisation has grown in its brief history, and is sure to raise the hackles of those who conceived of it playing a primarily supportive role to the local communities.
:::::::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)


===]===
== ] at FAC ==
{|
|
: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 ].]]


=== ] ===
"In geometry, the Shapley–Folkman lemma and the Shapley–Folkman–Starr theorem study the Minkowski addition of sets in a vector space". I think you're going to struggle finding reviewers for this article, but just let me say that lemmas don't study anything: that's what mathematicians do. ] ] 22:33, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
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>
] 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:
:Thanks Malleus, for both the caution about reviewers and the warning about anthropomorphizing lemmas. I shall be happy if I receive further copy editing suggestions like this. Cheers, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 22:38, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


::11. ].
::I'll endeavour to apply my limited mathematical knowledge to the rest of the article, but you might want to give ] a nudge. ] ] 22:42, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
<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.
:::Thanks Malleus!
</blockquote>
:::Geometry Guy has already been very helpful. He may prefer the splitting off of the "SF-Starr theorem" from the lemma, to improve the accessibility of the article. (I lack the energy to do rewriting of 2 artices.)
] 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)
:::The calls for A-class review elicited no edits or comments from the economics and mathematics projects, but the previous GA review received many helpful comments.
==='']''===
:::IMHO, the biggest flaw of the article is the animation of the non-convex consumer preferences, which has been taken from another article; it is encumbered by extraneous information from the other application.
], like the goal of every '']'', is reformation not punishment.]]
:::The double use of ]'s illustration is unconventional but (I believe) helpful for readers.
:::Best regards, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 22:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
::::I'm just trying to gee up the troops, don't expect too much from me. :-) ] ] 01:07, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
:::::You are doing a great job as a catalyst! <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 01:10, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

You give me too much credit. I'm reading and trying to understand at the same time; I just figure that if I can't understand then nobody else will either. What about that for arrogance! :lol: ] ] 22:31, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

:Hi Malleus,
:I am delighted that you have again contributed to the article, especially because it is challenging for you---just as it was for me when I first tried to read mathematical economics (via the New Palgrave)---and I want to acknowledge your help.
:I try to give credit to editors for their suggestions, following the example of kind editors like ThomasMeeks.
:Cheers, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 23:08, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
::I'll get to the end of the article one day soon I hope, but I'm disappointed that other FA reviewers have not yet followed my lead. ] ] 23:56, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

:::Be patient. Protonk's efforts are still in-coming. :) A few dedicated and talented reviewers will be very helpful in improving the article. I am pleased with the suggestions. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 23:59, 30 September 2011 (UTC)


===Mathematics and Wikpedia===
*Why is it do you think that so many are afraid of mathematics, and mathematics articles? ] ] 02:16, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


I participated in an ]. You should read that first, then this. (I am usually long-winded at first draft.)

It helps to have good graphics, at least for geometric-inclined readers (e.g. me). The Shapley-Folkman article benefits from David Eppstein's two illustrations, which outclass anything else in world literature. Nobody has even dreamed of creating explanatory graphics like David's. I am surprised that I haven't seen people citing the article yet. (I tried, but my article citing it has been held up in review for more than a year!) It has the best survey of applications; particularly the links to econometric journals should make it essential reading for M.A. students at good universities---or at least at Stanford! ;)

I would not say that people are afraid, but rather than many people are nervous and humble (unless they are young Americans, who have the world's highest positive response to the statement, "I have mathematical talent"!).

Compare mathematics and music: I was reading a bit about your countryman ] and reflecting on my ignorance of music, particularly the basics of ], particularly the ] that should seduce any mathematical scientist. Music is even more human than mathematics. Our ability to dance in groups is unknown in other species, I've read. Yet I have not read anything, because other interests and activities were more habitual/interesting/pressing.

Thus, it is a question of economics and of interest. If people understood that they could make better decisions for themselves, particularly to provide for their families, or to make medical decisions for their families, better, by understanding a basic course in statistics, then I think enrollment would increase, at least among mature adults. Young people are probably more motivated about income and idealism (saving the world). I became seriously interested in mathematics because I wanted to understand economics, courtesy of Reaganomics; I learned from economists that statistics was the most important skill to have.

Misplaced Pages's own ], acting in the real world, has helped nurses unjustly tried for murder, because prosecutors committed and judges accepted crazy statistical testimony. Mathematics is important in real life, particularly in criminal justice, business, and military affairs. I think that understanding the basics of probability are essential to proper reasoning. There should be no shortage of examples that make statistics and mathematics come alive. (I can say that I have used examples of fire-department statistics, which grab U.S. audiences, once I mention 9/11 and some personal ties.)


Another example of the importance of incentives and opportunities.
In the communist countries, mathematics attracted people because it was relatively free from Communist BS and unless you were Jewish and in the 1970s (or under Stalin's time) was relatively meritocratic. The USSR and Poland had great books written and inspired by Kolmogorov and Banach---and Kolmogorov was like the Bach of mathematics, so that their mathematical civilization was very inviting and inspiring. Even now, students in Eastern Europe know that science is an excellent way to obtain good jobs in Western Europe or the USA, which is another explanation of why they have such good students.


Boxer: "I will work harder":

One of the best writers of our time is the German poet and essayist ]. He has written a pamphlet ], calling on mathematicians to write for the public (even if they have to lie a little ...); he has also written a book for children, '']'', which is entertaining. The Misplaced Pages Project interview discusses the difficulty of writing for the public.


I would say that the U.S. and increasingly Sweden have been crippled by the anti-academic and anti-intellectual ], which hobble our high schools, particularly in mathematics. It is like ]. We are surrounded by intellectually dead people.
It used to be that Swedish gymnasium teachers had a Master's degree in one subject, and had written a B.A. thesis in another. (French gymnasium teachers must have a something like a Master's degree.)
Now, Americans and Swedes can get accreditation by taking watered down classes like algebra for teachers. How can students get inspired by teachers who don't know their subjects? (I was lucky to have caught the end of New Math and to have been taught by teachers recruited with post-Sputnik initiatives.)

We need teachers who are intellectually alive and interested in mathematics. But now, it is hard to imagine the best students taking bachelor of education degrees, which they need to get hired by public schools in the U.S. (If they take a B.A./B.S. and later get accredited, they will not get hired because their union contract makes them entitled to higher pay.)


''That'' is my short answer! ;) <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 03:16, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

:Further comment. I think some of the leading project members write what is obvious for them off the top of their heads. (I do the same in statistics, usually, and just give the general references I read when I learned the stuff.) Many of our mathematicians have interests in algebra and mathematical logic, and have been influenced by something called ], so they write articles that are hard for reactionary (]) mathematicians (or mathematical scientists like me) to understand. If they had more time, they would be able to write simpler articles, but they are usually writing what they consider to be trivialities in the most natural (i.e., category theoretic) way. This makes it difficult to understand some topics, usually in Ph.D.-training-level mathematics. However, most of our articles are quite accessible, and our editors take great pains to write inviting articles on topics of interest to the public or to undergraduates. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 03:35, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


From ] by Malleus et alia:
::I think that about hits the spot. I hardly ever edit in areas I've worked in, because the pain of trying to find citations for what you and everyone else in field knows to be true is just too much hassle. ] ] 00:56, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
<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 ==
===="": "Give 'em an inch, and they ask for a mile"====
The article ] would benefit from a good article review. (It is not yet as polished as the SF lemma article.) <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 00:44, 1 October 2011 (UTC)


=== FAC nom formatting === === A beer for you ===


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
FYI on how to format FAC nominations: ] (]) 15:06, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
|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! ===
;<s>'''"The road to wisdom": "To err, to err, to err"'''</s>
:"The road to wisdom": "To err, to err, to err"
::Sorry for over-emboldening. If it is any consolation, I did even more blunders, which were egregious because they were premature blunders, on the FA-scheduling page, where I had no business being.
::Thanks for the help! Sincerely, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 15:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
::Almost everyone who tries to nominate at the FA-scheduling page messes up. No worries. ] (]) 16:00, 4 October 2011 (UTC)


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
===Starr's result ===
|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)
Hello-So, rather than going to the original research, here's a question I have about Starr's result: Does the good behavior of the approximated economy come strictly from the number of consumers, or is it required (as in simple results about the ]) that the consumers are clones? ](]/]) 18:19, 5 October 2011 (UTC)


==== Thank You...and You're Welcome! ====
:This is a good question, which applies both to the results of Shapley & Folkman and of Starr. You might guess that ''non''-cloning would be essential, if you had read a (sloppy) remark in the otherwise good c. 1983 ''Econometrica'' paper by Whitney Newey and Soeren Bloemqist, on "nonlinear budget sets": It states that "averaging over characteristics" was "implicit" in aggregation, suggesting that non-cloning be essential.
:On the contrary, the propositions (and their proofs) make no assumption about the identity or non-identity of the summands, and it is interesting that everything holds even when all consumers are identical! Troeckel has a very clear statement about that. (It seems paradoxical that economics obtains more informative results by special cases of general theorems ....) You should look at the illustration in Mas-Colell's 1987 "Non-convexity" article, which shows a semigroup of sumsets: I tried to explain it on the talk page. Give me a minute and I'll cut and paste it here. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 18:45, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
:* {{cite book|last=Mas-Colell|first=A.|authorlink=Andreu Mas-Colell|chapter=Non-convexity|title=]|editor1-first=John|editor1-last=Eatwell|editor1-link=John Eatwell, Baron Eatwell|editor2-first=Murray|editor2-last=Milgate|editor2-link=Murray Milgate|editor3-first=Peter|editor3-last=Newman|editor3-link=Peter Kenneth Newman|publisher=Palgrave Macmillan|year=1987|edition=first|newedition=The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics Online|doi=10.1057/9780230226203.3173<!-- SNAFU at NP? 30 Jan 2011-->|pages=653–661|url=http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde1987_X001573|id=()|ref=harv}}


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!===
:The best image would illustrate the set
: ("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))
:: S = 1/2 ( × ∪ × )
:and then
:: <math>S_N = \frac{1}{2^N} \sum_{1\leq n \leq 2^N}{S} \qquad (N \geq 2)</math>
::for N = 0, 1, 2,3, ∞.
:A translate of this set appears in Mas-Colell's article on non-convex sets (etc.). <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 18:58, 5 October 2011 (UTC)


{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
Thanks! Someday, this will take some serious thought! (...and I need to convince my university to pick up Palgrave.) ](]/]) 19:08, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
|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&section=16 -->
* ...For your ongoing efforts to eliminate tendentious distortions from histories and biographies relating to 1970s American radicalism. ] (]) 16:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


:You can read Mas-Colell and Starr's ''New Palgrave'' articles at their homepages. You don't need a subscription. Starr's book used to be available in draft form at his homepage. Enjoy <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 19:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC)


], 16 December 1935]]
== ''The Signpost'': 3 October 2011 ==
] poster by ]: "Hurry to join ]!"]]


:Dear Brother Carrite!
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
:Thank you very much!
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2011-10-03}}
</div><!--Volume 7, Issue 40-->
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''']''' &middot; ] &middot; ] &middot; ] (]) 05:23, 6 October 2011 (UTC)</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0185 -->


: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.)


Thank you for your work recently on ]. One of the pleasures of writing about Kemble or ] is writing about personalities, rather than cookie-cuts.
== 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. ]&nbsp;<span style="font-weight:bold;">&middot;</span>&#32;(]) 18:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC) <!-- Template:ConductDiscussion -->


:Good luck! <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 18:58, 8 October 2011 (UTC) :In solidarity, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 17:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:32, 1 November 2023

Labor donated

Archiving icon
Archives

no archives yet (create)


The Signpost
24 December 2024
Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
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

A drawing of a facepalm.

"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."

John Milton, Areopagitica

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)
Elen, if I want your opinion, I shall ask for it.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz

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)

"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)

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

Negative reinforcement, like an auto-da-fé, helps learners distinguish between right and wrong action.).

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 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

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!
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.
  1. Page of the painting at Prado Museum
  2. Deor at the site of the society Ða Engliscan Gesiþas.
  3. Modern English translation by Steve Pollington, Published in Wiðowinde 100, at the site of the society Ða Engliscan Gesiþas.
The hamstrung smith Welund, portrayed on the Franks Casket.
The hamstrung smith Welund, portrayed on the Franks Casket.

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:

  1. Don't think you're anything special.
  2. Don't think you're as good as us.
  3. Don't think you're smarter than us.
  4. Don't convince yourself that you're better than us.
  5. Don't think you know more than us.
  6. Don't think you are more important than us.
  7. Don't think you are good at anything.
  8. Don't laugh at us.
  9. Don't think anyone cares about you.
  10. Don't think you can teach us anything.

An eleventh rule is:

11. Don't think that there aren't a few things we know about you.


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

The goal of Request for Comments on Users (RFC/U), like the goal of every auto da fé, is reformation not punishment.

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 RedRose64 Redrose64!
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.


Stakhanov on the cover of Time Magazine, 16 December 1935
Agitprop poster by Vladimir Mayakovsky: "Hurry to join shock brigades!"
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)