Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:08, 27 January 2014

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

• Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

• Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

• If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: ].

• If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

John Michael Greer Deletion

Hello, I am not an editor, just a thankful Misplaced Pages user. I would like access to a page on John Michael Greer that you deleted. I am not the creator of the page, but I need to review this page for research purposes. And no, I am not John Michael Greer, nor am I a member of the large 100-year old religious order that he heads. I am not even acquainted with Mr. Greer other than through his works and the frequent citation of his works.

As I understand the page was deleted because editors were unaware of his "notability." Before I attempt to quantify Mr. Greer's "notability," in short, if you were to ask 10 people who were familiar with Peak Oil who the "most notable" current peak oil theorist was, Greer, along with James Kunstler (who has a wiki page) would be one of the most common responses. But if you were to ask people familiar with occultism who the "most notable" living occultist was, they would all name Mr. Greer.

Within the Peak Oil community his "notability" has made him one of the most sought-after keynote speakers, including keynote addresses at: 5th Peak Oil and Community Solutions Conference, Great Lakes Bioneers Conference, Chicago Bioneers, Greensong, etc.

As you are aware, the purpose of a "Keynote" address is to "establish a key underlying theme for an event" Mr. Greer's ideas have certainly helped "establish the key underlying themes" within peak oil and certain environmental circles (especially those associated with "deep ecology" opposed to the new "bright green" environmentalism. This can be demonstrated by his inclusion as the "keynote" piece in the first Dark Mountain Project http://dark-mountain.net/mountaineers/john-michael-greer/

This "Dark Mountain Project" was the primary contribution of the certainly less notable Paul Kingsnorth, who has a wikipedia page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/Paul_Kingsnorth

This search will verify a long list of environmental and peak oil groups where he has recently been the keynote speaker: https://www.google.com/search?q=John+Michael+Greer+keynote&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Clearly, quite a broad audience of people consider him noteworthy enough to set the agenda for their conferences and festivals, and his celebrity within these communities is considered good publicity!

The reason for this notability is that he is the originator and foremost proponent of a "long decline" theory in opposition to the "crash" scenarios proposed by Kunstler. Mr. Greer's contribution has been so profound that the "long decline" scenario has become the most common view and even Kunstler has changed his predictions considerably to follow Greer's. This theory has become one of the most sited underlying tenants of "deep ecology" influenced environmentalism as well.

• (added later) Mr. Greer has been a frequent guest in many Peak Oil blogs, books, etc, including James Kunstler's Webcast. Indeed, Mr. Kunster wrote a book called "Too Much Magic" (a reference to Mr. Greer's position as Arch Druid) which was instigated by Mr. Greer's theories. http://kunstlercast.com/tag/john-michael-greer

It seems quite impossible to assert that Mr. Greer is not "noteworthy" within this field when he is a perennial keynote speaker and even has books written about him by some of the other most noteworthy people in the field. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.83.26.161 (talk) 16:08, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

In addition, he is an extremely prolific author of more than 30 published books, some of which are best-sellers within their genres: http://www.amazon.com/John-Michael-Greer/e/B001IOFELW

In terms of his contribution to occultism, he has authored some of the best selling and most influential recent books on the topic, including the New Encyclopedia of the Occult. In addition, he is the appointed head of a large initiate religious order with a history that goes back a century. http://aoda.org/AODA_History.html

This is not, as was suggested, a self-appointed, "meaningless," or "made up" role.

Thank you for your consideration. I hope you will promptly return this page. 97.83.26.161 (talk) 15:27, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.83.26.161 (talk) 15:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. In terms of Misplaced Pages, "notability" means basically only one thing: have reliable independent sources written anything about him? See WP:GNG. We do not normally consider other criteria, such as somebody's contributions to some field of study.

The deletion was decided by consensus at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/John Michael Greer. If you want this result overturned, the best way to go about it is to produce references to reliable independent sources about Greer that weren't already mentioned in the discussion.  Sandstein  16:56, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I could pretty easily find many more citations and references, but would this be a start? (Note, I tried to avoid the citations such as by library associations, which were included in the discussion)

John Michael Greer is an American author, blogger and speaker, most notably on the topics of Peak Oil, Resource Depletion, and Occult spiritual practice. Mr. Greer has been a contributing author throughout the Peak Oil Community, including The Oil Drum (http://www.theoildrum.com/tag/john_michael_greer) zero hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-11/guest-post-john-michael-greer-if-four-horsemen-arrive-offer-beer) and resilience.org.

Mr. Greer's works are frequently cited, recommended and discussed by peak oil experts, organizations, and publications, such as the Transition Towns (network) (http://transitionvoice.com/2011/11/transition-plans-meetings-a-waste-of-time-says-greer/) and James Howard Kunstler (http://kunstlercast.com/tag/john-michael-greer)

He has become influential lecturer, delivering keynote addresses for organizations including the Bioneers (http://bioneerschicago.org/category/2013-saturday/) and the Greensong Festival. (http://www.greensongfestival.org/keynote.html)

His recent books include the wealth of nature reviews: 1. http://transitionvoice.com/2011/09/adam-smith-got-it-way-way-wrong/ 2. http://www.earthtimes.org/going-green/wealth-nature-new-book-john-michael-greer/1085/ 3. http://www.resilience.org/stories/2011-12-07/review-wealth-nature-john-michael-greer 4. http://www.alternativesjournal.ca/community/reviews/wealth-nature

and the Blood of the Earth reviews: 1. http://www.bookslut.com/blog/archives/2014_01.php#020489 2. http://dgrnewsservice.org/2012/05/04/book-review-the-blood-of-the-earth/ 3. http://www.rootsimple.com/2012/10/book-review-the-blood-of-the-earth-an-essay-on-magic-and-peak-oil/

In 2003, Mr. Greer was elected the 7th head of the Ancient Order of Druids, the AODA http://aoda.org/AODA_History.html He has published many books on the occult. 97.83.26.161 (talk) 20:12, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

At a glance, many or most of these sources don't qualify under our rules because they are not substantial coverage of (rather than by) Greer, or are self-published sources without professional editorial oversight, such as blogs. Are there any among these sources that meet the criteria mentioned in WP:GNG? You really do need to read these rules I link to, especially WP:GNG, because most of the editors interested in deletion discussions, including me to be honest, only care about that.  Sandstein  20:25, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I believe all or most of these citations are appropriate for the claims they support. I have read and used the guidelines in providing you sources.

I would assume that Greer would fall under the category of "creative professionals," and that references showing that he is "regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers" would suffice. Greer meets the criteria in a ROBUST way. I can and have provided many references, including those with editorial oversight. I specifically selected sources that would meet the criteria, including "significant" sources with wikipedia pages themselves. An example given of an appropriate source is that of Slashdot. In no way is Slashdot substantively different as a source than The Oil Drum. Greer is frequently mentioned in print media and in books that have Misplaced Pages pages, but I thought it easier to provide easily verifiable online sources. In addition, Greer meets the criteria as the author of books which are widely discussed. I provided references for that, but I could provide HUNDREDS more.

Truly, I'm a professional in this field. Greer is discussed by 3rd parties ALL THE TIME. It would be very unusual to hear a discussion of Post Industrial Future within this community and NOT hear Greer referenced or quoted. Really, omitting Greer in such a discussion would be cause to question credibility. 97.83.26.161 (talk) 21:08, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Out of context, would you like some 3rd party references to Greer? There are several above, but I could provide more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.83.26.161 (talk) 20:59, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Thought I'd add another discussion of Greer's work from the publication of the Post Carbon Institute http://dev.energybulletin.net/50751 Again, not a personal blog, has an editorial board, is a "notable" organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.83.26.161 (talk) 21:24, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

And here by Skyscript, founded by Deborah Houlding http://www.skyscript.co.uk/rev_geomancy.html97.83.26.161 (talk) 21:32, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

And another 3rd party discussion of his work in Patheos http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildhunt/2012/07/guest-post-the-blood-of-the-earth.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.83.26.161 (talk) 21:34, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

And more, frequently these citations actually point out how famous and influential Greer is in Peak Oil circles. "Famous for his Archdruid Report, John Michael Greer is one of the most clear-sighted of authors who are grappling with the multiple crises..." http://www.earthtimes.org/going-green/wealth-nature-new-book-john-michael-greer/1085/ Again, Earthtimes is not a personal blog, but an online magazine. And here Transition Voice, another online magazine assumes that its readers would be familiar with Greer. http://transitionvoice.com/2010/11/greer-finds-power-in-nature-spirituality/ And here at Transition US: http://transitionvoice.com/2010/11/greer-finds-power-in-nature-spirituality/ 97.83.26.161 (talk) 21:58, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

(note, corrected some links including the Skyscript link.) 97.83.26.161 (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Reviewed in Plenty: http://www.plentymag.com/magazine/reviews_green_media.php?page=2 Popular Anthropology Magazine: http://popanthro.org/ojs/index.php/popanthro/article/view/32 And here a response to Greer's ideas by Oil Drum founder Sharon Astyk: http://www.resilience.org/stories/2010-02-11/pick-your-hat-response-john-michael-greer 97.83.26.161 (talk) 22:10, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

These sources are difficult to evaluate for me; there is a whiff of fringeness or unreliability to many of them. What we normally look for are clearly reliable sources like major mainstream media outlets or peer-reviewed journals or textbooks from respected publishers. That's not to say that your sources are necessarily inadequate, but they are not compelling enough for me to overturn the deletion discussion. You'd need to find a consensus of editors to determine that this coverage is sufficient as the basis of an article. You can attempt to do so by asking for a review of the deletion at WP:DRV and submitting the most compelling of your new-found sources to the discussion.  Sandstein  05:58, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Much appreciated. I think I will leave it to your judgement (or to someone with more time to devote to Misplaced Pages.) I actually don't disagree that the sources are "fringy." However, the sources I chose ARE the leading sources, organizations, and experts on Peak Oil as cited in Misplaced Pages's Peak Oil article, and as I have demonstrated, Greer is a constant topic of discussion among those leading sources, organizations, and experts. This is not exactly an "academic" field of study with peer-reviewed journals. Nor are the subtleties of Peak Oil theory the topic of mainstream media attention. And when Greer is mentioned in mainstream media outlets, it is by less-than-reliable sources, like Glen Beck: http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/11/12/glenn-live-like-people-determined-to-be-free/ It could even be that the whole topic of Peak Oil is too fringy to merit a Misplaced Pages page, but Greer's contributions have fundamentally changed the discussions within that community. As the links above show, it is increasingly becoming the case that one can no longer have an in-depth discussion of Peak Oil--both as an environmental topic and as a social phenomenon--without mentioning Greer.

Anyway, this has given me insight into how much work goes into maintaining Misplaced Pages. Sincerely, thanks for doing it. 97.83.26.161 (talk) 14:48, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

My comments about you

Greetings Sandstein, I'm sure you don't care about what I have to say and I am sure you think I hate you. I don't and I wanted to clarify that. I do think you are too heavy fisted when it comes to AE and sanctions. In a lot of the cases you are, IMO, much to fast to jump to exteremes and particularly lengthy blocks or bans. Misplaced Pages admins need to be fair and unfortunately I don't think you, with your block them and foget them mentality is healthy for the project. So although I have mentioned your name several times in discussions I wanted you to know that I don't think you are a bad person, I just think you are too extreme in your use of the block button and that sort of behavior isn't beneficial to the project or to the reputations of the admin group as a whole. Kumioko (talk) 17:42, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Your opinion is noted, although in general broad claims are taken much less seriously than complaints about specific actions backed up with evidence. If anybody disagrees with administrative actions I've taken, there are well-established venues for independent review and appeal of them. If I may ask, what is it that you are actually here for? You don't seem to have contributed to any articles since September.  Sandstein  17:59, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Its not any particular action you have taken (although I could name several I disagreed with) but the general notion you seem to have that you are never wrong and that you favor extreme action for even minor infractions of policy. Your "broad discretion" is frequently far too reaching than should be considered reasonable. I am also disappointed that no one seems to care, seemingly because you generally stay close to Arbcom and AE where people generally don't care about and have the attitude of guilt. Since you asked why I keep editing, I really don't know, in general I am fed up with Misplaced Pages and the hypocrisy. I may edit again someday but there are too many problem and too few people willing to find solutions too them. There are even less who are willing to accept there is a problem. The disgraceful release of Visual Editor is a factor and the WMF's lack of respect for the community insisting we clean up their mess; I'm tired of being told I can't be trusted; I'm tired of the us and them mentality between admins and editors; I'm tired of the general lack of trust of editors and I find it shameful how IP's and new users are treated; we have too many useless templates and too much policy and rules; I'm tired of being told by admins who abusively use the block button that I can't be trusted with the block button knowing that I will almost never use it, because I think blocks should only be used in rare situations and even then only for limited duration; I'm tired of certain Wikiprojects and editors/admins being allowed article ownership over their articles of interest. The list goes on. These are just some of the reasons I don't edit much anymore. I don't even bother to revert vandalism anymore. There are 2 pages on my watchlist that have had vandalism since July and August respectively that haven't been fixed. I want to see how long it takes for someone else to catch it since my efforts aren't trusted or appreciated. It took months for someone to fix the RFA stats link that was still going to the toolserver and there are still a lot of other things linking there that haven't been fixed yet. To be honest, I expect for someone to block me at some point or for someone to send me to Arbcom. That would have been a massive insult in the past but now, with this environment, I expect it. This community doesn't want to change things, they want yes men and women who will go along and get along...which, much to my shame I did for a long time. I partially blame myself for allowing Misplaced Pages to devolve into the sorry state in which it now can be found. I should have spoken up sooner. Kumioko (talk) 18:30, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I can't really say that I've understood all of this, but in cases of "wiki-burnout" such as the one you seem to describe, my advice is to stop caring about the social aspects of Misplaced Pages for a while and focus on improving articles that interest you. That's what we are all here for, after all.  Sandstein  18:34, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually its not Wiki burnout per sey and I am not going to edit articles until some of those social aspects change. Its no fun to edit an article just to have some admin revert your change because they "own" the article. Just try making a change to Charles Lindburgh and see how long it lasts. Try adding an infobox to an article under WP Novels or editing an article "owned" by US Roads. This project is losing editors faster than we can gain them because the social aspects make it not enjoyable, we don't have enough qualified people with the admin tools to do the job and we keep losing more. Some of those that are still here shouldn't be. Kumioko (talk) 18:59, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Sandstein, your advice to Kumioko is good ... for wikipedia of 2009. But there have been a few sea-changes in the past year or so, wherein the social aspects have begun to sap the WP:-D from the editing aspects, unless one concentrates on extremely out-of-the-way content (MONGO recommends articles about specific named glaciers in nature preserves as particularly soothing). If you want specific examples, see the greenbox here, which summarizes an editor who lasted 12 edits and 10 hours after first contact, WT:WER#My_experience_and_why_I_am_not_going_to_edit_Wikipedia, or see the December 26/27/28th portions of an editor who lasted 9 edits and 46 hours after first contact.

  You weren't involved in either of these (and unlike Kumioko I've never seen you goof &mdash woo!), plus I only came into these two situations after the fact. But the wikipedia social-system has qualitatively changed, recently, in the effects if not the intent; I believe that is part of Kumioko's complaint, albeit not all of it (they are also concerned about RfA and such). The intersection of increasing readership spawning increasing COI-pressures, along with the decreasing editor-count spawning busy-busy WP:NINJA-revert-by-default wikiCulture, have methinks collided. Nobody is doing anything *wrong* in these two concrete examples, although a couple mistakes were made, they were correctable, and well within the wikiCulture norms. But in my book, neither of these things should have happened (the way they did), if we ever want to stop bleeding personnel... but similar things happen every day, all the time. Hope this helps, thanks for improving wikipedia. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 09:45, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, that may be true, but it is a fact of life that the complexity of social systems tends to grow with time, including Misplaced Pages. All we can and should expect from individual editors is (a) work to improve articles, (b) observe the community's policies and guidelines, and (c) work collegially with others. If a high enough proportion of editors do so, a relatively productive working environment should (re-)emerge.  Sandstein  09:59, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Appeal of enforcement action (January 2014)

The appeal of your enforcement action has been declined. The comments made by the arbitrators may be useful in proceeding further. For the Arbitration Committee, Rschen7754 20:05, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement

You have been mentioned at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Lecen Cambalachero (talk) 21:28, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Because the message by Lecen your complaint is about seems, in part, to be a complaint about me, I'm not taking any action in this case.  Sandstein  21:40, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I understand. Still, as I have mentioned you in the enforcement case, I thought that you should have known about it anyway. Cambalachero (talk) 21:43, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Jaqeli

I was wondering if he was still under a ban from everything related to Armenia and Georgia, because he has been editing articles on Georgia. --Երևանցի 00:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

The ban concerns only material that is related to both Armenia and Georgia.  Sandstein  09:55, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Meaning related to both Armenia and Georgia at the same time? --Երևանցի 00:16, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Block Evasion Report

You blocked User:NinaGreen for edits in violation of her topic ban on the Shakespearean authorship question. (I haven't reviewed the details of what she edited, but the Groatsworth is only significant in modern times because of its reference to Shakespeare.) An IP address has posted to WP:ANI complaining about the block. I have filed a sock-puppet investigation request. Although editing logged out is often simply a mistake, editing logged out when blocked is more typically a form of block evasion. I don't know if you are interested or would prefer to let other admins look into the issue. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:34, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Also, she has been discussing her issues with the complexity and unfairness of Discretionary sanctions, but she wasn't topic-banned by Arbitration Enforcement under the discretionary sanctions, but in the original decision by the ArbCom. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:34, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

As far as I can see, Robert, those ip edits were made before Nina was blocked, and also without any pretense of being another person. She often forgets to log in. I'd post on the SPI, but I'm on a handheld device and it's killing me. Bishonen | talk 02:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC).