Revision as of 02:50, 6 February 2013 editVanished user 19794758563875 (talk | contribs)17,339 edits →being a heterosexual may systematically bias your viewpoint: see above.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 08:28, 23 January 2024 edit undo2603:6081:78f0:7410:c9b:590:c473:bda (talk)No edit summary | ||
(144 intermediate revisions by 50 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Not around|3=June 2021}} | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
|maxarchivesize = 250K | |maxarchivesize = 250K | ||
Line 10: | Line 11: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|align = "center" bgcolor= indigo| If I judge it requires discretion, I'll contact you. This is tremendously one-sided. I assure you, I feel terrible about it. Really I do. | |align = "center" bgcolor= indigo| If I judge it requires discretion, I'll contact you. This is tremendously one-sided. I assure you, I feel terrible about it. Really I do. | ||
⚫ | |- | ||
|align="center" bgcolor= red|'''Note that my contributions are down a lot these days, I'm busy with other stuff, but otherwise fine. Also note that for some reason I'm not getting e-mail alerts when this page is edited, so for important issues please send me an e-mail directly.''' | |||
|} | |} | ||
Line 26: | Line 29: | ||
*] | *] | ||
*] | *] | ||
*] |
*] | ||
*]}} | |||
== |
== Precious anniversary == | ||
{{User QAIbox | |||
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" | |||
| title = Three years ago ... | |||
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|alt|]|]}} | |||
| image = Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg | |||
|rowspan="2" | | |||
| image_upright = 0.5 | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Helping Hand Barnstar''' | |||
| bold = fringe topics | |||
⚫ | |- | ||
| normal = ... you were recipient<br /> no. ''']''' of ],<br /> a prize of QAI! | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Thank you so much for setting up the auto-archives bot on my userpage. More than appreciated! ] (]) 23:49, 9 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
}} | |||
⚫ | It's five years now! --] (]) 06:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
⚫ | : |
||
... and six! --] (]) 07:32, 5 January 2019 (UTC) | |||
== Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion == | |||
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at ] regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on ]. <!--Template:An3-notice--> Thank you.--] (]) 19:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
== Care to comment? == | |||
Hi WLU, you were very objective in your assessment of the situation at chiropractic during the recent RFC; I was hoping you would provide another objective assessment . The controversy is over the addition of 'chiropactic is a health profession' to the lead, which was reverted . Any insight would be appreciated. Regards ] (]) 02:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
== ] at ], taken to ]. == | |||
Hey, WLU. I'm alerting you to ] (]) 09:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
== Thanks == | |||
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" | |||
|rowspan="2" valign="top" | {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|alt|]| ]}} | |||
|rowspan="2" | | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" | '''The BLP Barnstar''' | |||
|- | |||
|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For your laborious work expanding ], which goes far to improve the article in accordance with ], ] and related policies, I award you this BLP Barnstar. Thank you for bringing Misplaced Pages closer to its goal. ] (]) 03:44, 26 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
:Glad you liked it :) | |||
⚫ | : |
||
... and seven --] (]) 06:41, 5 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
== Arbitration request notification == | |||
== Ritual Abuse == | |||
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at ] and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use— | |||
* ]; | |||
* ]. | |||
Dear WLU, | |||
⚫ | |||
is my assumption correct that your of the opinion that faith based abuse doesn't occur? And why exactly would you come to that conclusion given the number of media reports, police investigations and court cases? As described in ] this type of abuse occurs in many communities. Subsets of the Nigerian community for example. I would just be very interested as to why it is that you want to present the topic in that manner. I would be very interested in talking to you or communicating via e-mail on this topic. Let me know if that would be of interest.--'''] ]''' 09:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
I did also link the article ] for disambiguation in the article Ritual abuse, that you wrote 68 % of.--'''] ]''' 09:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
:I have no opinion on faith-based abuse. The satanic ritual abuse moral panic was a moral panic, and the few "real" cases were people dressing up in robes while raping children - not an organized satanic cult. In other words, the "ritual" aspects were secondary to the rape. | |||
⚫ | :I am not interested in communicating on this further. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 13:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC) | ||
::It's a bit premature to say ''welcome back'' but, hey, I have to work with I've got, so '''welcome back!''' ] (]) 23:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | ::::Definitely not "welcome back", which is a pity. For wikipedia. Because I'm amazing. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC) | ||
::: It wasn't my intention to emphasise the "ritual" aspect of this. From what I understand mostly this has nothing to do with any kind of faith but rather with organised crime and power. However when it does occur that groups get to gather and in organised ways rape, torture and kill children and adults then the victims (if they survive) are often not believed because people find the article on ritual abuse and come to the conclusion that everything is made up. This is absolutely not fair and horrible for the victims and makes it hard to stop these crimes from going on... That is all I wanted to say. I would really like to collaborate on having an article next to satanic ritual abuse that described actual cases of extreme organised sexual absue, for which much evidence can be found in different countries and cultures from all over the world. I'll if I'll find someone else to work on that with then...--'''] ]''' 17:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC) | |||
== being a heterosexual may systematically bias your viewpoint == | |||
::::My concern is that, while the ritual abuse moral panic is a distinct "thing", a social phenomena that is written about in a coherent manner in the scholarly literature. The ] page, in addition to its capitalization problems, seems to trip over two aspects of ], specifically ] and ]. As for being original research, a quick skim of the references, for instance, seem to be closer to the ] page than anything else (McFadyen 1993, Richardson, 2015, and Scott, 2001 are, from my recall, about the satanic ritual abuse moral panic, though from an uncritical believer perspective) and would likely be better placed there. The rest is just kind of a list of cultural practices that have no real link to each other. Are the lip plates of the Mursi tribe actually a form of "ritual child abuse"? Certainly tattooing young girls in the Apatani tribe so they would not be abducted doesn't strike me as even close to "ritual" abuse. And the definition of "abuse" is very culturally determined, since within a specific cultural context it might be seen as abusive to '''not''' give a child ritual tattoos, lip extenders, and neck rings. While I personally consider such practices distasteful, within the culture it's considered beautifying. Breast flattening is another example where it causes harm, but is done to preserve chastity. Where is the "ritual"? An overall comment or question would be, where is the ] that labels these things to be "ritual child abuse" rather than "cosmetic mutilation"? Right now it seems like it is the wikipedia editors who are putting these items into a bucket, when it should be the ''sources'' that do so. | |||
::::And where do dowries come into it? Where is the ritual? Dowries are at least an economic issue more than they would seem to be a ritual practice. Why bring up fire-related deaths? | |||
⚫ | ::::Overall the article strikes me as extremely problematic and based more on the beliefs of the editors writing the page rather than the consensus, or even disagreement, of relevant scholars. I don't see why there should be a page where all of these items are listed in a hodge-podge, rather than the information now found on the page simply being part of a section in a main article. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC) | ||
== Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
"being a heterosexual may systematically bias your viewpoint" and therefore your edits should be considered suspect. Really? -- ] <sup>]</sup> 20:48, 5 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:Nobody can edit from nowhere but that doesn't mean everyone's starting point is unproblematic. Being a transexual woman is less a problem than the fact that Andrea James has undertaken real life and on-wiki activities that significantly affected (choosing an ''extremely'', essentially ''inaccurate'' word) the lives of several scholars. While her COI as a transexual woman might mean care and scrutiny of her edits, her actions as an activist on and off wikipedia are the history and reason that a topic ban may be appropriate. | |||
:Actually, thank you for this point, it has forced me to rethink the issue and highlighted the real problems. Unfortunately I've the section so now I can't edit it, but I will point to this discussion if it comes up in the future. Had I the ability to access the database directly, I probably would have phrased it as "being a transexual activist who has used intimidation and fear to silence scholarly debate and make a researcher's life miserable indicates that your viewpoint may be too biased to deal with a topic neutrally". It's the actions that were the problem, not the person. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 21:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
::When someone shoots a thief who is entering his home, who should be punished? The thief or the home owner who defended his house? -- ] <sup>]</sup> 22:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | ::: |
||
::::Okay, let me say this. In my opinion, you are blaming the victim for lashing out to the abuser. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 22:09, 5 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::::Who would you define as the victim and the abuser here? | |||
:::::Also, how is such an argument relevant to the neutral summary of reliable sources, the core content policies to determine page content? If you think James Cantor, or ] saying things in the scholarly literature about transsexual people that Andrea James found personally hurtful is justification for the wikipedia community to allow Jokestress, I strongly question this and point to the following which seem to bear me out in a wikipedia context: | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] (the policy) | |||
* Again, ] (the essay) | |||
:::::My belief is that a good outcome of arbitration would be a mutual interaction ban and a topic ban (complete for Jokestress, and a formal limitation of James Cantor to talk pages with no edits to sexology articles). | |||
:::::Perhaps I am cold-hearted but I think the personal offence felt by Andrea James at J. Michael Bailey's book/James Cantor's articles/Ray Blanchard's theories is less important than ensuring the relevant scholarly and popular debate is faithfully reported on the wikipedia pages. This seems like one of the situations where nonfinancial COIs must be recognized as impacting the quality of the editing and debate on a page. For instance, Jokestress's objections to my own edits seem rather spurious and based more on the fact that I happen to get along with James Cantor (or some other reason I'm not aware of) than any actual substance. Rarely have my edits been criticized for improperly summarizing a source, and I have frequently integrated sources on the basis of her comments (which I've also done for James Cantor). If she can't ] after our few, civil and largely trivial interactions in which I've responded very reasonably to her comments, that seems to be quite a red flag for her ability to neutrally and calmly the pages. Can you point to any edit I have made that gave her any reason to question my integrity or neutrality as an editor on these pages? ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 00:05, 6 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::Your amended description of Andrea above is a perfect example of why you are not neutral. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 02:50, 6 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd notice --> ] (]) 02:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
== Recent addition to your statement == | |||
== Precious anniversary == | |||
I have seen that you divhided your last addition to your statement. Although this may hide the content, it still breaches the 500-word limit. I'd recommend to remove it and add a diff linking to what you wrote. That way, everyone will be able to read your thoughts and you won't be above the word count. | |||
{{User QAIbox/auto|years=Nine}} --] (]) 08:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC) | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:Michelle Remembers.jpg== | |||
] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 17:24, 6 April 2023 (UTC) | |||
From the Arbitration Committee, — ]] 20:58, 5 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:Will do, thank you. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 20:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
::You're very welcome WLU. Have a nice day. — ]] 21:07, 5 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::Et vous aussi! ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 21:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 08:28, 23 January 2024
This user may have left Misplaced Pages. WLU has not edited Misplaced Pages since June 2021. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Please note that I usually don't do e-mail; if it's about wikipedia use my talk page. |
If I judge it requires discretion, I'll contact you. This is tremendously one-sided. I assure you, I feel terrible about it. Really I do. |
Note that my contributions are down a lot these days, I'm busy with other stuff, but otherwise fine. Also note that for some reason I'm not getting e-mail alerts when this page is edited, so for important issues please send me an e-mail directly. |
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Precious anniversary
fringe topics | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 356 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
It's five years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
... and six! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
... and seven --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:41, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Ritual Abuse
Dear WLU, is my assumption correct that your of the opinion that faith based abuse doesn't occur? And why exactly would you come to that conclusion given the number of media reports, police investigations and court cases? As described in Ritual Child Abuse this type of abuse occurs in many communities. Subsets of the Nigerian community for example. I would just be very interested as to why it is that you want to present the topic in that manner. I would be very interested in talking to you or communicating via e-mail on this topic. Let me know if that would be of interest.--Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 09:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC) I did also link the article Ritual child abuse for disambiguation in the article Ritual abuse, that you wrote 68 % of.--Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 09:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- I have no opinion on faith-based abuse. The satanic ritual abuse moral panic was a moral panic, and the few "real" cases were people dressing up in robes while raping children - not an organized satanic cult. In other words, the "ritual" aspects were secondary to the rape.
- I am not interested in communicating on this further. WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/complex 13:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- It's a bit premature to say welcome back but, hey, I have to work with I've got, so welcome back! Johnuniq (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- Definitely not "welcome back", which is a pity. For wikipedia. Because I'm amazing. WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/complex 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
- It's a bit premature to say welcome back but, hey, I have to work with I've got, so welcome back! Johnuniq (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- It wasn't my intention to emphasise the "ritual" aspect of this. From what I understand mostly this has nothing to do with any kind of faith but rather with organised crime and power. However when it does occur that groups get to gather and in organised ways rape, torture and kill children and adults then the victims (if they survive) are often not believed because people find the article on ritual abuse and come to the conclusion that everything is made up. This is absolutely not fair and horrible for the victims and makes it hard to stop these crimes from going on... That is all I wanted to say. I would really like to collaborate on having an article next to satanic ritual abuse that described actual cases of extreme organised sexual absue, for which much evidence can be found in different countries and cultures from all over the world. I'll if I'll find someone else to work on that with then...--Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 17:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- My concern is that, while the ritual abuse moral panic is a distinct "thing", a social phenomena that is written about in a coherent manner in the scholarly literature. The Ritual Child Abuse page, in addition to its capitalization problems, seems to trip over two aspects of WP:NOT, specifically WP:OR and WP:NOTDIR. As for being original research, a quick skim of the references, for instance, seem to be closer to the satanic ritual abuse page than anything else (McFadyen 1993, Richardson, 2015, and Scott, 2001 are, from my recall, about the satanic ritual abuse moral panic, though from an uncritical believer perspective) and would likely be better placed there. The rest is just kind of a list of cultural practices that have no real link to each other. Are the lip plates of the Mursi tribe actually a form of "ritual child abuse"? Certainly tattooing young girls in the Apatani tribe so they would not be abducted doesn't strike me as even close to "ritual" abuse. And the definition of "abuse" is very culturally determined, since within a specific cultural context it might be seen as abusive to not give a child ritual tattoos, lip extenders, and neck rings. While I personally consider such practices distasteful, within the culture it's considered beautifying. Breast flattening is another example where it causes harm, but is done to preserve chastity. Where is the "ritual"? An overall comment or question would be, where is the reliable source that labels these things to be "ritual child abuse" rather than "cosmetic mutilation"? Right now it seems like it is the wikipedia editors who are putting these items into a bucket, when it should be the sources that do so.
- And where do dowries come into it? Where is the ritual? Dowries are at least an economic issue more than they would seem to be a ritual practice. Why bring up fire-related deaths?
- Overall the article strikes me as extremely problematic and based more on the beliefs of the editors writing the page rather than the consensus, or even disagreement, of relevant scholars. I don't see why there should be a page where all of these items are listed in a hodge-podge, rather than the information now found on the page simply being part of a section in a main article. WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/complex 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
- It wasn't my intention to emphasise the "ritual" aspect of this. From what I understand mostly this has nothing to do with any kind of faith but rather with organised crime and power. However when it does occur that groups get to gather and in organised ways rape, torture and kill children and adults then the victims (if they survive) are often not believed because people find the article on ritual abuse and come to the conclusion that everything is made up. This is absolutely not fair and horrible for the victims and makes it hard to stop these crimes from going on... That is all I wanted to say. I would really like to collaborate on having an article next to satanic ritual abuse that described actual cases of extreme organised sexual absue, for which much evidence can be found in different countries and cultures from all over the world. I'll if I'll find someone else to work on that with then...--Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 17:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of Mumps outbreaks in the 21st century for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mumps outbreaks in the 21st century is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mumps outbreaks in the 21st century until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Velayinosu (talk) 02:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
Nine years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Michelle Remembers.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Michelle Remembers.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Categories: