Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Martinphi (talk | contribs) at 02:59, 16 February 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives and sandboxes

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Dreadlocke's Sandboxes

I don't archive everything, some things I delete after responding to them; and I don't archive in any specific chronological order.

The Original Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for your many excellent contributions to paranormal articles. - Solar 13:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks much, Dreadlocke, for checking in on the TM article and for pointing me to the Guideline on Criticism.TimidGuy 22:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I need to archive the TM Talk page. We sure have filled it with verbiage. I do appreciate your appearing on the Talk page and noting Sethie's personal attack.TimidGuy 02:22, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the endorsement on my Talk page in response to Sethie's challenges on COI. I really appreciate your feedback. I may be posting an RfC today related to my dispute with Sethie on his disallowing a rebuttal in the cult section.TimidGuy 12:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: EVP

Yeah, strong feelings are the spice of life.. but it can sometimes get in the way of common sense. ---J.S 05:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

You're a hero

Thanks, Dreadlocke. Lately I'd been thinking I needed to find a forum to answer questions about verifiability, etc. Sethie seems to be making up rules sometimes. I really appreciate your feedback on the topic and for pointing me to those forums.TimidGuy 22:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Really appreciate your help, Dreadlocke. I've now added an official warning tag to Sethie's Talk page.TimidGuy 12:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the e-mail. And for the action you took. Great to have your perspective. And note the conciliatory message on my Talk page.TimidGuy 20:25, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Natasha Demkina

I really hate it when there are editors who make it their personal mission to push an agenda on certain entries, it ruins the entire community approach, doesn't it. I'll have a look at your draft, but I haven't read up on the topic much so I think that the most that I can do is to go over the wording.

On a personal level, it always rings alarm bells with me when anybody calls any paranormal ability a gift. I guess that it is a cultural thing. There are a lot of implications to that word. The biggest being that a gift must be given, and in order for something to be given there must be a giver.

perfectblue 07:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

So that you know in advance, I'm a total skeptic about this case (sorry, but I can't rationalize it with my beliefs on scientific, magical or religious healing), but I will accept that any verifiable claim that was made about her and her abilities can and should be documented (I firmly believe that it is important to document what people believe or what they say happens, even if it is/appears to be wrong).

perfectblue 17:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm working on my own draft in my sandbox, its going to use most of the same information that you have, but broken down slightly differently, and without a few details that I think are irrelevant (I'm treating it as an entry on her abilities and claims rather than an entry on her). It should be shorter and a little more acceptable to skeptics, but without having alleged and so-called every other sentence, and having the core of the paranormal belief in it. I'll do some more work on it and you can see what you think.

perfectblue 08:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

To answer your comment on my talk: Yes, actually, it does appear to be :) Now it's just hit-and-runs instead of concentrated insurgency. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 20:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Totally-Disputed Template

Hi - thanks for telling me that - I've restored the !votes and changed the result to keep. I just wonder why the person who removed the anon !vote didn't restore the others (even though we're not supposed to remove anon messages). Anyway, thanks :) Martinp23 10:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

If only.

I came across the essay WP:TIGERS today and I wish I had done so a long, long time ago. I'm sure you can see why. :) Cheers, - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 21:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Demkina and the Center

Well, the opening paragraph is her biography, who she is, why she was famous, and what she is doing now. If it doesn't belong there somebody will need to add a "Where is she now" section on at the end which would be a lot more messy.

It's valid information, it means that even though she was not able to prove her abilities to science, she has entered a known institute to continue research of some nature. Taking it out would make it look like she just gave up and went home.

perfectblue 08:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Award

Thanks very much Dreadlocke, That's a great start to the new year, it's always nice to get an award. Thanks again. - Solar 10:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I accept your offer of help!

Thanks so much, Dreadlock. Yes, it would be really great to have your help. My advocate seemed to give me some good advice early on, but mostly he's been somewhat uncommunicative. Plus, it's been kind of an odd situation to have Sethie's advocate appear in my discussion with my advocate. And my advocate acknowledged he has no experience with Medcom. It will be great to have advice from an experienced editor like yourself.

Where should we communicate?TimidGuy 16:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Request for mediation for John Edward

This user subpage is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. If you want to revive discussion regarding the subject, you might try contacting the user in question or seeking broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/OpenNote is deprecated. Please see User:MediationBot/Opened message instead.

— Elembis 18:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Guideline on Paranormal

Hello Dreadlocke, I thought you might be interested in an attempt I have made to come to some kind of consensus on James Randi's inclusion in every paranormal article. I think this would be a first step towards a wider guideline on paranormal issues. Let me know what you think. - Solar 19:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Wizard (fantasy)

I put in the request for a move. Goldfritha 03:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/John Edward. For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Thanks for the notice, I will be away for the weekend and probably will not be able to participate until next Tuesday, Jan 23. Dreadlocke ☥ 00:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

No worries

The mediation hasn't actually begun yet, that was just an indication that the MedCom will take on the case. I'll leave a note on the page saying that you'd rather not begin just yet, and that way no Mediator will take the case yet. How's that sound? ^demon 02:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

It has been brought to my attention that you have been editing quite regularly since you said you were sick. Is it fine by you if we proceed? ^demon 18:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

The RfC on Cult

Hi Dreadlocke, if you have the time your participation in the RfC at Cult would be most appreciated. Thanks. Tanaats 19:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

rap disambizzle

I've always thought of "rap" and "hip hop" as related but slightly different genres, with rap having more emphasis on the lyrical content and delivery, and hip hop more geared toward the rhythm and beat and whatnot. But I get the feeling my view is neither qualified nor mainstream, so I pretty much shut up about it. That much having been said, I don't really remember what I did last summer, so I'm not sure how it is affected by the change of redirects. I will say this much though: It is generally a bad idea to "fix" redirects that aren't broken, especially if they may need to be "re-fixed" at a later date. It's generally a good idea to take the most conservative possible approach in interpreting what the writer intended to link to. If a link in an article points to something besides a disambiguation page, and to a target that isn't an obvious error, I've learned it's probably best to just leave it alone... simply because semantics can change, articles can be split, redirects can be replaced with more specific articles, etc. This probably doesn't answer your question, but I'm not really sure what you were asking. Let me know if you'd like more advice, or if I've said too much. —freak(talk) 21:45, Feb. 4, 2007 (UTC)

Link

Talk:Criticism_and_response_in_parapsychology

That article you linked me to is great, now that I had the time to read it. I hope we can find some better polls that say more about how scientists in general, when polled anonymously view psi. I suspect the one cited on the NAS in the ESP article was not private, but who knows. Martin _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 05:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Oddball barnstar!

		The Oddball Barnstar
		For creating the Superpup article! 64.62.8.242 06:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I see you were the editor who created the article - fantastic, yet odd find! Funny! 64.62.8.242 06:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Dreadlocke

... Is a superpup!!! Cool, dude. Martin _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 07:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

I've never been through this process. What is your take? Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Criticism_and_response_in_parapsychology Martin _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 01:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I've been advised to create a sandbox for the Criticism and response in parapsychology article. It's here, renamed to Controversy in parapsychology. I'm not sure if people want to edit under my user page, or edit the main article. But, if it's decided to edit the sandbox, It would be great to have your input. I won't be editing in the beginning, while I see what format people want to use etc. I'm putting this on several talk pages. Martin _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 05:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Psychic

Talk:Psychic#Focus Martin _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 06:33, 11 February 2007 (UTC)