Misplaced Pages

User talk:Hotpine

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tgeorgescu (talk | contribs) at 19:31, 7 November 2024 (→Tgeorgescu: In order to clarify my position, as you have requested). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 19:31, 7 November 2024 by Tgeorgescu (talk | contribs) (→Tgeorgescu: In order to clarify my position, as you have requested)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

re: NPOV of "consequences of paternity fraud"

hey hotpine, I saw your post on the wiki talk page for paternity fraud wiki. I just wanted to thank you for saying what you did. I am absolutely gobsmacked that some people will look at a situation where: A.) the man not only recently found out his girlfriend/wife cheated on him, and B.) she didn't care about or respect him enough to tell him that, while C.) coming to terms with the fact that the children he thought were his, aren't

and somehow twist that situation to one where *he* is the villain. Alone, any one of those has the potential to be devastating, life altering information. As it stands now, the post vilifies and shames the abused while completely ignoring the actions and behavior of the abuser. There's really no two ways about it: this is at best inappropriate content and at worst the hateful spewings of an out of touch academic with zero empathy.

The consequences of paternity fraud run broad and deep. There is no shortage of content for this. At some point, after we've talked about counseling, divorce, reasons for secrecy (implicit or explicit; if a mom isn't 100% sure of who the father of her new born is, she should have the decency to let all parties know, including the child), consequences for the child, recourse with the biological father, uphill legal battles for the father to avoid what amounts to involuntary servitude, long term effects of being manipulated into that situation, learning your mother would do that to your 'father,' and so on... then maybe we can talk about how the dad is bitter.

Thanks! Glad to know there's at least one other person who agrees. Hotpine (talk) 07:37, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:47, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in pseudoscience and fringe science. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:47, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:52, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes. We are biased.

Jimmy Wales, founder of Misplaced Pages, once wrote:

Misplaced Pages's policies ... are exactly spot-on and correct. If you can get your work published in respectable scientific journals – that is to say, if you can produce evidence through replicable scientific experiments, then Misplaced Pages will cover it appropriately.

What we won't do is pretend that the work of lunatic charlatans is the equivalent of "true scientific discourse". It isn't.

So yes, we are biased.

And we are not going to change. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:25, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. Farley, Tim (25 March 2014). "Misplaced Pages founder responds to pro-alt-med petition; skeptics cheer". Skeptical Software Tools. Archived from the original on 19 October 2021. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
  2. Hay Newman, Lily (27 March 2014). "Jimmy Wales Gets Real, and Sassy, About Misplaced Pages's Holistic Healing Coverage". Slate. Archived from the original on 28 March 2014. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
  3. Gorski, David (24 March 2014). "An excellent response to complaints about medical topics on Misplaced Pages". ScienceBlogs. Archived from the original on 19 October 2021. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
  4. Novella, Steven (25 March 2014). "Standards of Evidence – Misplaced Pages Edition". NeuroLogica Blog. Archived from the original on 20 October 2021. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
  5. Talk:Astrology/Archive 13#Bias against astrology
  6. Talk:Alchemy/Archive 2#naturalistic bias in article
  7. Talk:Numerology/Archive 1#There's more work to be done
  8. Talk:Homeopathy/Archive 60#Misplaced Pages Bias
  9. Talk:Acupuncture/Archive 13#Strong Bias towards Skeptic Researchers
  10. Talk:Energy (esotericism)/Archive 1#Bias
  11. Talk:Conspiracy theory/Archive 12#Sequence of sections and bias
  12. Talk:Vaccine hesitancy/Archive 5#Clearly a bias attack article
  13. Talk:Magnet therapy/Archive 1#Contradiction and bias
  14. Talk:Crop circle/Archive 9#Bower and Chorley Bias Destroyed by Mathematician
  15. Talk:Laundry ball/Archives/2017
  16. Talk:Ayurveda/Archive 15#Suggestion to Shed Biases
  17. Talk:Torsion field (pseudoscience)/Archive 1#stop f**** supressing science with your bias bull****
  18. Talk:Young Earth creationism/Archive 3#Biased Article (part 2)
  19. Talk:Holocaust denial/Archive 12#Blatant bias on this page
  20. Talk:Flat Earth/Archive 7#Disinformation, the EARTH IS FLAT and this can be SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN. This article is not about Flat Earth, it promotes a round earth.
  21. Talk:Scientific racism/Archive 1#THIS is propaganda
  22. Talk:Global warming conspiracy theory/Archive 3#Problems with the article
  23. Talk:Santa Claus/Archive 11#About Santa Claus
  24. Talk:Flood geology/Archive 4#Obvious bias
  25. Talk:Quackery/Archive 1#POV #2
  26. Talk:Ancient astronauts/Archive 4#Pseudoscience

Noticeboard

See Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Sexual addiction. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:28, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Tgeorgescu

Tgeorgescu: I don't understand your edits. You linked to e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience, but my username isn't mentioned there, and I don't see reference to any other place in your edits where the determination was made that I have "shown interest" in "alternative medicine", "pseudoscience", or "gender-related disputes or controversies". Please clarify your position with objective evidence and public proceedings, or undo your edits.

It isn't clear why you posted the "Yes. We are biased." section. Please clarify this, or undo your edits.

It isn't clear why you posted the "Noticeboard" section. Please clarify this, or undo your edits.

So far, your behavior has been abrasive and unwelcome. After this matter is resolved, please do not interact with me to the furthest extent possible.

In order to clarify my position, as you have requested:
Those notifications were making you aware that your edits were about topics which fell under discretionary sanctions. I never said that I sought arbitration about your edits.
But if you edit again articles pertaining to pseudoscience or alt-med or gender issues, you will be issued again awareness notifications. I may post standard, necessary notifications even if otherwise I should refrain from posting at your talk page. tgeorgescu (talk) 19:31, 7 November 2024 (UTC)