User talk:Orangemarlin: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Orangemarlin (talk | contribs) →just removed my contributions to a talk page: Removing conversation |
req for clarification on pseudoscience cat arbcom |
||
| Line 230: | Line 230: | ||
I've started collecting relevant excerpts from reliable sources at [[User:Vassyana/New Thought]]. Feel free to make use of the material. [[User:Vassyana|Vassyana]] ([[User talk:Vassyana|talk]]) 15:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC) |
I've started collecting relevant excerpts from reliable sources at [[User:Vassyana/New Thought]]. Feel free to make use of the material. [[User:Vassyana|Vassyana]] ([[User talk:Vassyana|talk]]) 15:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC) |
||
== Request for Clarification on Pseudoscience Category Arbitration == |
|||
[[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Request_for_clarification:_RfA:Pseudoscience_.28Category.29|Request for clarification on Pseudoscience Category implementation]] -- Let's get some expert guidance from the Arbcom on the use of this pejorative category tag.[[User:Self-ref|-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)]] ([[User talk:Self-ref|talk]]) 03:39, 5 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 03:39, 5 October 2008
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A gift for you!
Enjoy. You will recognize some old friends. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 20:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- "Clinical trials testing the efficacy of all these forms of homeopathic medicines have often reported positive results." So this is the kind of writing we can expect from that crowd? I was going to submit myself to their vetting process to edit there. Not after reading that load of horse manure. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I hoped CZ would succeed but prospects don't look good at all unless Sanger does something to keep articles from being hijacked. Their global warming article also had a load of absolute junk added to it until I raised concerns. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 21:34, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- It might be worth dropping Larry (or one of the constables) a note about Dana Ullman's history here. Guettarda (talk) 21:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- He probably knows already. And I'm sympathetic to the argument that someone's problems here shouldn't follow them all across the internet. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 00:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- I remember when you were mean and cranky. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 00:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- He probably knows already. And I'm sympathetic to the argument that someone's problems here shouldn't follow them all across the internet. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 00:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- I don't care all that much. I just read two or three articles that I would consider an indicator of the quality of CZ, and they rank far below Wikipedia's. We may have new age hippies running about here thinking that New thought heals people, but they have a culture of "different makes us better." No, better makes you better. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- The CZ Evolution article is appalling. "Among many reasons, the concept of evolution is attractive to scientists!!!!" Huh? The CZ evolution article is not even 10% the quality of the WP article. You know, I never looked at their articles until now. It isn't even close. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link! ROFL at "In biology, the concept of evolution applies to a multi-causal natural process whereby populations of inbreeding living organisms change in their biological characteristics over generations." Looks like they've got inbreeding editors over there, real hillbilly stuff... dave souza, talk 22:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- I read a couple of those. Are you sure those aren't Conservapedia? Keeper ǀ 76 01:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- It is interesting to observe that Citizendium is, to some extent, a refuge for poor-quality Wikipedia POV forks. User:Pierre-Alain Gouanvic left Wikipedia after being unable to bend our article on Vitamin C megadosage to reflect his Paulingite views, and he's now essentially transferred his evangelical POV fork to Citizendium. Interestingly, he's also been a major contributor to the homeopathy article. I recognize more than a few other names in that homeopathy article history, most of whom retain negative associations. I think this is remarkable, actually: Wikipedia's system appears demonstrably superior when it comes to producing neutral, balanced, accurate scientific pieces. Citizendium's reliance on "experts" is undone by their (non-)definition of the word "expert" - it's more like a repository of POV forks that violated our neutrality and accuracy policies than an expertly written and edited encyclopedia. MastCell Talk 21:45, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- This is an outstanding observation. What I see is that Citizendium appoints its scholar-expert-editors based on a system that favors one POV, rather than a broad-base of thinking. Because Wikipedia works in a, sometimes difficult, environment of discussion and consensus, many voices rise to the top. It's only articles like Orgone, which isn't watched by enough editors, where a strong POV appears. Wikipedia's Homeopathy, though not perfect, is well-written and mostly balanced. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think they deliberately choose one POV or another. It's more that they're desperately short of contributors so they're glad for whomever they can get. (Hey, they even appointed me as one of their editors.) Since they haven't reached critical mass a few people with idiosyncratic worldviews can have disproportionate influence. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 00:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- (addendum) Very interesting exchange here on Sanger's view of neutrality. It seems that fringe views inevitably will be given excessive weight at CZ. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 18:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- They need to be clearer about who, exactly, is an "expert". Ray, you have academic credentials and a record of research and publication in your area of expertise. On the other hand, I can tell you right away that someone who lists their major academic interest as exposing "the costs in terms of suffering and early deaths of the lack of conscience of many scientists in the life sciences" will be consitutionally incapable of writing a good, balanced, sensible article about Vitamin C. MastCell Talk 21:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ray has academic credentials in Monty Python? Wow, didn't know that. I'm very impressed. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 00:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- I was going to make a lame joke about searching for the holy grail of the climate change problem, but... Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 01:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ray has academic credentials in Monty Python? Wow, didn't know that. I'm very impressed. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 00:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- They need to be clearer about who, exactly, is an "expert". Ray, you have academic credentials and a record of research and publication in your area of expertise. On the other hand, I can tell you right away that someone who lists their major academic interest as exposing "the costs in terms of suffering and early deaths of the lack of conscience of many scientists in the life sciences" will be consitutionally incapable of writing a good, balanced, sensible article about Vitamin C. MastCell Talk 21:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- This is an outstanding observation. What I see is that Citizendium appoints its scholar-expert-editors based on a system that favors one POV, rather than a broad-base of thinking. Because Wikipedia works in a, sometimes difficult, environment of discussion and consensus, many voices rise to the top. It's only articles like Orgone, which isn't watched by enough editors, where a strong POV appears. Wikipedia's Homeopathy, though not perfect, is well-written and mostly balanced. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- It is interesting to observe that Citizendium is, to some extent, a refuge for poor-quality Wikipedia POV forks. User:Pierre-Alain Gouanvic left Wikipedia after being unable to bend our article on Vitamin C megadosage to reflect his Paulingite views, and he's now essentially transferred his evangelical POV fork to Citizendium. Interestingly, he's also been a major contributor to the homeopathy article. I recognize more than a few other names in that homeopathy article history, most of whom retain negative associations. I think this is remarkable, actually: Wikipedia's system appears demonstrably superior when it comes to producing neutral, balanced, accurate scientific pieces. Citizendium's reliance on "experts" is undone by their (non-)definition of the word "expert" - it's more like a repository of POV forks that violated our neutrality and accuracy policies than an expertly written and edited encyclopedia. MastCell Talk 21:45, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- I read a couple of those. Are you sure those aren't Conservapedia? Keeper ǀ 76 01:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link! ROFL at "In biology, the concept of evolution applies to a multi-causal natural process whereby populations of inbreeding living organisms change in their biological characteristics over generations." Looks like they've got inbreeding editors over there, real hillbilly stuff... dave souza, talk 22:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- The CZ Evolution article is appalling. "Among many reasons, the concept of evolution is attractive to scientists!!!!" Huh? The CZ evolution article is not even 10% the quality of the WP article. You know, I never looked at their articles until now. It isn't even close. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- It might be worth dropping Larry (or one of the constables) a note about Dana Ullman's history here. Guettarda (talk) 21:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I hoped CZ would succeed but prospects don't look good at all unless Sanger does something to keep articles from being hijacked. Their global warming article also had a load of absolute junk added to it until I raised concerns. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 21:34, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- (ri)Sanger needs to lay off OM's whiskey. •Jim62sch•dissera! 19:01, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
My 20,000th edit
So, I'm accepting nominations for my 20,000th edit. It could be vandalizing Keeper's page, but that's so yesterday. I could vandalize my own page. But I'm looking for something special, something that makes the world a better place, something that cause everyone to break out in song. Or vomit. Either way works for me. The floor is open for nominations. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 00:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Clay Aiken could use some BLP violations. Or, for even more Huggle vandalism warnings, edit Wales, or Paris Hilton. Just add whatever "the spirit moves you to add". Your first 19,999 edits have been dreadfully boring. Have some fun! I won't block you, promise :-) Keeper ǀ 76 01:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ya could vandalize my page....no one ever does. Or leave me a completely off-the-wall post like this one. - NeutralHomer • Talk 01:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- A rewrite of ID saying that it represents the Only Truth, thus destroying the dreaded cab meme in the process. •Jim62sch•dissera! 13:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Take your pick: (1) Open a WP:RFC/U on Jimbo. (2) Nominate WP:RFAR for MfD. (3) Redirect Sarah Palin to Schizoaffective disorder. Just trying to be helpful. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 13:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Why not start an article on Paul Thurrott's exposé of the iCabal,[2] an evil shadowy group of Apple and Mac users using intrigue to assert an insidious influence over the rest of the world? . . dave souza, talk 15:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- I see you're a fan of Roughly Drafted magazine. But if it gets rapid deleted, which it will, because of the PC-cabal running Wikipedia...ooops....then there will be no record of the edit, and my 20,000th edit will be vandalizing Keeper's user talk. So, I'm going to have to add a BLP violation to Sara Palin. It is my duty. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 22:38, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Why not start an article on Paul Thurrott's exposé of the iCabal,[2] an evil shadowy group of Apple and Mac users using intrigue to assert an insidious influence over the rest of the world? . . dave souza, talk 15:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Take your pick: (1) Open a WP:RFC/U on Jimbo. (2) Nominate WP:RFAR for MfD. (3) Redirect Sarah Palin to Schizoaffective disorder. Just trying to be helpful. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 13:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- A rewrite of ID saying that it represents the Only Truth, thus destroying the dreaded cab meme in the process. •Jim62sch•dissera! 13:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
<- Drink a fair amount of your favorite adult beverage and let your subconscious move you. spryde | talk 16:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- You type that under the assumption that his first 19,999 edits haven't been accomplished this way....Keeper ǀ 76 16:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- True, but anyone who deals with the topics he chooses to deal with needs a bit of liquid xanex every now and then. spryde | talk 16:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Keeper, I told you that in confidence. Now you tell the world. I'm hurt. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 16:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't tell the world. Your talkpage has about as many fans as a marl... --- oops! I promised I wouldn't do that anymore :-) Keeper ǀ 76 17:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- You're leaving when? Please don't let the door hit your ass. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 17:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe I want the door to hit me.......Keeper ǀ 76 17:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- I just know that I'll forget, and my 20,000th edit will be a response to one of your inane comments. Just my luck. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 17:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- But will it be an inane response? An inebebriaticated one? •Jim62sch•dissera! 18:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- "Inebebriaticated" has a wonderful internal consistency, like when one of my college roommates used to say "mispronounciation." Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 18:33, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Your old roomie might have been related to an old boss who said (frequently), two peas in a pot, and model role instead of role model. Or the bright analyst on CNN who just this morning said that the bailout was a "fate accomplete". •Jim62sch•dissera! 19:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- That's too much. Of course, I always say roll model, I never say role model, but no one ever seems to catch it. Keeper ǀ 76 19:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- ROFL. •Jim62sch•dissera! 19:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Shirley it is mute wither it is roll model or role model. KillerChihuahua?!? 22:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Don't call me Shirley, ha! Oh, I loved that movie, what was it called? Oh yeah, Heir Plain. Keeper ǀ 76 14:01, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- Shirley it is mute wither it is roll model or role model. KillerChihuahua?!? 22:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- But will it be an inane response? An inebebriaticated one? •Jim62sch•dissera! 18:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- I just know that I'll forget, and my 20,000th edit will be a response to one of your inane comments. Just my luck. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 17:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe I want the door to hit me.......Keeper ǀ 76 17:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- You're leaving when? Please don't let the door hit your ass. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 17:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't tell the world. Your talkpage has about as many fans as a marl... --- oops! I promised I wouldn't do that anymore :-) Keeper ǀ 76 17:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Keeper, I told you that in confidence. Now you tell the world. I'm hurt. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 16:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- True, but anyone who deals with the topics he chooses to deal with needs a bit of liquid xanex every now and then. spryde | talk 16:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I could use 9,000 dancing penises on my talk page. If you get blocked, you can be rest assured that I'll just point and laugh. seicer | talk | contribs 00:50, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
←After much deliberation (I actually didn't edit for a number of hours pondering what to do), and previewing a very funny vandalism of Keeper's page, and taking into consideration some of the suggestions above (the Sarah Palin redirect would have been loads of fun, but only those of us here would have understood the humor), I woke up this morning, and just edited like I always do. I hereby present my 20,000th edit. Just cleaned up some stuff on what I think is the best thing I've done here at Wikipedia. It was at the top of my watchlist, and I saw what an editor had done, and it was clear that there was a minor error in spelling in the article. Boring. But what I do. I still may vandalize Keeper's page just for fun. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 16:03, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- congrats! And personally, I'm glad it wasn't my talkpage. That could come back to bite you down the road :-) .....Keeper ǀ 76 19:07, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- I would have immediately reverted the vandalism, but left the link for all to ponder. It's only something I would do amongst friends. BTW, all that I've done around here, do you think vandalizing your page would be the biggest bite I'd get? Methinks you think too much of your page--anyone who would see the vandalism would think, "hmmm, Keeper's page again. yawn."OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- Heh! You misread. I merely meant that "overcontributing" to my talkpage could easily (and probably rightfully) land you in a crowd that said "OM is a myspacer". You are one of the good guys OM. You mean well (you don't always say what you mean well, but you mean well), and you are intelligent, competent, and sincere. You have passion for this website (some would say that's a detraction, but I say it's a plus), and you do whatever it takes to make this crazy little "free encyclopedia" stay accurate, precise, sourced, and reliable. And to top it off, you like baseball. The wrong team yes, but at least you like the right sport. My first encounter with you was quite negative. I told you off, then you told me off, and I had a strongly negative view of you and your motives. I was completely wrong. You, and several others, have proved to me that you are here for the right reasons, and for the good of the public/free information that Wikipedia is supposed to be providing. Good on you, OM. Don't quit, and don't compromise on your convictions. Keeper ǀ 76 19:20, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ah heck, I missed it...I am about 70 edits of the meaning of life x 1000, could post here another 60 times I guess as my 31000th was here. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- How can you tell which edit is your 20,000th? - NeutralHomer • Talk 22:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- What a silly question. Go to Special:Contributions/Orangemarlin and start counting from 1. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 23:25, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- hahahahaha! Is ther some easier way for those of us who get easily distrac-....look, a kitty! - NeutralHomer • Talk 23:44, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- Rule #47 of my user talk page is: Don't expect to actually get an answer to a question. However, since you're helping on Syracuse University, I keep a link of really cool tools at the bottom of my user page. Milestone tool is what you're seeking. It has no use whatsoever other than to see what you've done in the past. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 04:06, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Sweet, thanks dude-...hey, another kitty! - NeutralHomer • Talk 05:17, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Rule #47 of my user talk page is: Don't expect to actually get an answer to a question. However, since you're helping on Syracuse University, I keep a link of really cool tools at the bottom of my user page. Milestone tool is what you're seeking. It has no use whatsoever other than to see what you've done in the past. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 04:06, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- hahahahaha! Is ther some easier way for those of us who get easily distrac-....look, a kitty! - NeutralHomer • Talk 23:44, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- What a silly question. Go to Special:Contributions/Orangemarlin and start counting from 1. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 23:25, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- How can you tell which edit is your 20,000th? - NeutralHomer • Talk 22:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ah heck, I missed it...I am about 70 edits of the meaning of life x 1000, could post here another 60 times I guess as my 31000th was here. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- Heh! You misread. I merely meant that "overcontributing" to my talkpage could easily (and probably rightfully) land you in a crowd that said "OM is a myspacer". You are one of the good guys OM. You mean well (you don't always say what you mean well, but you mean well), and you are intelligent, competent, and sincere. You have passion for this website (some would say that's a detraction, but I say it's a plus), and you do whatever it takes to make this crazy little "free encyclopedia" stay accurate, precise, sourced, and reliable. And to top it off, you like baseball. The wrong team yes, but at least you like the right sport. My first encounter with you was quite negative. I told you off, then you told me off, and I had a strongly negative view of you and your motives. I was completely wrong. You, and several others, have proved to me that you are here for the right reasons, and for the good of the public/free information that Wikipedia is supposed to be providing. Good on you, OM. Don't quit, and don't compromise on your convictions. Keeper ǀ 76 19:20, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- I would have immediately reverted the vandalism, but left the link for all to ponder. It's only something I would do amongst friends. BTW, all that I've done around here, do you think vandalizing your page would be the biggest bite I'd get? Methinks you think too much of your page--anyone who would see the vandalism would think, "hmmm, Keeper's page again. yawn."OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
FAC
If you're still looking for a place for 20,000, here's an Alzheimer-related FAC: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rosetta@home. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:52, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
FSC
We could really udse some moe Featured sound candidates nominators and voters. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 13:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Any comment ...
here? Slrubenstein | Talk 19:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- This is a bit more complicated than I first thought. My first read through is I agree with you. But I'm going to take another read tomorrow. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 05:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Slr, I hope you watch my page. I'm going to respond. I think about 75% of the points were anti-semitic. The others are debatable. However, what a huge mess. I've heard about these nationalistic battles in certain articles, but I've never seen one up close and personal. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 16:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Your fish...
never rooted for them before this weekend, or not that I remember any way. They did what they needed to today, and I thank you for it. At least now NY media will ease up on my boys. Wonder whether Collapse! or Moose (hopefully!) winning 20 will be the back page story. TravellingCari 21:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Huzzah for the Marlins. This morning, the Sunday New York Times sports section had an article praising the Mets for all of the "heart" they'd demonstrated in clawing back into wildcard contention. But I suppose people need their illusions. MastCell Talk 21:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Haven't seen today's Times yet, will do that while I go get a pedicure between Yankee games. "Heart" speaks volumes when there isn't much more to say. As the discussion on my talk shows, this one is statistically less painful for Mets fans, but it still hurts. TravellingCari 21:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Met's choked, flatlined, and were pronounced. Time of death, 16:09 EDT. Cause of death: Florida Marlins. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 00:20, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- *chuckle* indeed. Nothing worse than sitting through a loss and post-game "celebration" in the rain. It's part of why I was so thrilled my boys staved off elimination next Sunday. Nothing to taint the day even though it meant little. 8/10 at home and so far 4/5 on this road trip. Where was this play earlier? TravellingCari 01:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Shea it aint so, oh yes it is. GoodDay (talk) 13:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- *chuckle* indeed. Nothing worse than sitting through a loss and post-game "celebration" in the rain. It's part of why I was so thrilled my boys staved off elimination next Sunday. Nothing to taint the day even though it meant little. 8/10 at home and so far 4/5 on this road trip. Where was this play earlier? TravellingCari 01:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Met's choked, flatlined, and were pronounced. Time of death, 16:09 EDT. Cause of death: Florida Marlins. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 00:20, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Haven't seen today's Times yet, will do that while I go get a pedicure between Yankee games. "Heart" speaks volumes when there isn't much more to say. As the discussion on my talk shows, this one is statistically less painful for Mets fans, but it still hurts. TravellingCari 21:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
All right, we're getting close to the time to start putting some money on the table, huh? Who's it gonna be? You got this disgrace to his country or ... ya know ... The Nation ... but ... it's just really hard for me to figure out how you missed the boat this year when you could take advantage of the opportunities in your own backyard oh, my, they have "multiple issues" ... eek . I say, an LA team is going all the way; you have to save Menstrual cycle from FAR if I'm right. HA HA HA !!!! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, since there's no official AL Central champion as of this moment, I need time to review my betting choices. Not being much of a La-la land type of person (lacks blonde hair, can't surf, eats red meat, and stays the full 9 innings for a baseball game), my support may be elsewhere at this time. So, I have to save Menstrual cycle if I lose? What do I get if I win? Oh wait, I know. Help make Syracuse University FA. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 23:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- That's not a smart choice: I would have to recuse at FAC if I got involved, and the last (current) time that happened, the result was not pretty (see User talk:Raul654). You don't want me touching your FAC unless you want to draw the wrong kind of attention to yourself at FAC :-) Are you seriously telling me you think Minnesota might have a chance of going all the way? Then why are they still playing when everyone else is done <duck> ? It takes more than a closer and a catcher to play with the big guys, ya know. (And what's this BS about Californians being all blonde surfers; you're not going to try to push that one by me, are you? Next you'll be calling it "Cali" or "Frisco". And there's more to California than Anaheim.) I'm looking forward to your edits to Menstrual cycle; I may even have to come to a game if it's an LA series. (Eeeek, not that I want a repeat of the SF Bay series ... ) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- But you can edit? I don't mean you become a serious editor, just the copy edit, point out badly formatted citations thing. I've always dropped a note at your page about articles close to FAC, and you've dropped in and made comments. That's what I meant. But you'll do that anyways, so this is not a good bet. I'll have to think of something. However, it appears that Keeper76 will be suicidal since his Twins choked. My thoughts are that the Angels are going to win the AL. Your Bosox are not going to make without Beckett. Tampa Bay is good, but the Angels are better. In the NL, it may be a fringe theory, but the Cubs are just jinxed, in a whole different way than the Red Sox were. So, I think it will be LA, who are the Rockies of this year. They have momentum and a hot Manny. An all LA series!!!!!OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 14:23, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm actually very reluctant to edit SU at all for a variety of reasons, Orange. I can make sure someone else helps you. Uh, so we both think LA is going to make it, how am I going to get you to save a FAR? I was so looking forward to posting a note to Marskell to keep the Menstrual cycle FAR open as Orange owed me a baseball bet and was going to be doing the research. If Tampa Bay makes it, we'll both have made fools of ourselves. (I looked up at the TV once in the middle of a Wiki post, and said to my husband, "Is that Kazmir? Why doesn't he go play for a real team ... oops ... he is now.") SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yikes the Dodgers won. The Anaheim Angels of Burbank, Thousand Oaks, Santa Monica, Rancho Santa Margarita, Garden Grove, Pasadena, and Marina del Rey did not. Dodgers/Red Sox maybe? Wouldn't that be cool!!!! OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 01:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Grrrr. Have I ever mentioned I hate the Dodgers? One of the Phillies games I went t featured the Phanatic crushing a can of nutri-system (or whatever) junk with one of those tamping things the grounds crew uses. Lasorda was furious. It was hilarious. •Jim62sch•dissera! 20:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yikes the Dodgers won. The Anaheim Angels of Burbank, Thousand Oaks, Santa Monica, Rancho Santa Margarita, Garden Grove, Pasadena, and Marina del Rey did not. Dodgers/Red Sox maybe? Wouldn't that be cool!!!! OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 01:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm actually very reluctant to edit SU at all for a variety of reasons, Orange. I can make sure someone else helps you. Uh, so we both think LA is going to make it, how am I going to get you to save a FAR? I was so looking forward to posting a note to Marskell to keep the Menstrual cycle FAR open as Orange owed me a baseball bet and was going to be doing the research. If Tampa Bay makes it, we'll both have made fools of ourselves. (I looked up at the TV once in the middle of a Wiki post, and said to my husband, "Is that Kazmir? Why doesn't he go play for a real team ... oops ... he is now.") SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- But you can edit? I don't mean you become a serious editor, just the copy edit, point out badly formatted citations thing. I've always dropped a note at your page about articles close to FAC, and you've dropped in and made comments. That's what I meant. But you'll do that anyways, so this is not a good bet. I'll have to think of something. However, it appears that Keeper76 will be suicidal since his Twins choked. My thoughts are that the Angels are going to win the AL. Your Bosox are not going to make without Beckett. Tampa Bay is good, but the Angels are better. In the NL, it may be a fringe theory, but the Cubs are just jinxed, in a whole different way than the Red Sox were. So, I think it will be LA, who are the Rockies of this year. They have momentum and a hot Manny. An all LA series!!!!!OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 14:23, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- That's not a smart choice: I would have to recuse at FAC if I got involved, and the last (current) time that happened, the result was not pretty (see User talk:Raul654). You don't want me touching your FAC unless you want to draw the wrong kind of attention to yourself at FAC :-) Are you seriously telling me you think Minnesota might have a chance of going all the way? Then why are they still playing when everyone else is done <duck> ? It takes more than a closer and a catcher to play with the big guys, ya know. (And what's this BS about Californians being all blonde surfers; you're not going to try to push that one by me, are you? Next you'll be calling it "Cali" or "Frisco". And there's more to California than Anaheim.) I'm looking forward to your edits to Menstrual cycle; I may even have to come to a game if it's an LA series. (Eeeek, not that I want a repeat of the SF Bay series ... ) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
ArbCom
Hi. I changed the bullet points to numbers. If that's not what you had in mind, I don't have any objection if you want to reformat my comments without changing their meaning. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 18:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Just the numbers. Thanks. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
FWIW
"WTF" was my reaction too. [3]. Good grief. Antandrus (talk) 21:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Originally, my "WTF" was "WTF" is going on with a new RfA for Gwen? I thought I missed some Wiki-drama again. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:42, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
MEDRS
The page has been cleaned up for cleaner input on the mediation; pls weigh in? Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources (medicine-related articles) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding your view.
- About this, I'm sure you didn't mean to characterize User:Paul gene as being generally disruptive. He doesn't seem to have a future as a policy wonk, but he has done some good work in psychiatric articles, which are not the most pleasant environment for knowledgeable editors. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC) (who is not watching this page)
- Agreed - I've seen Paul gene fighting the good fight (meaning improving the quality and accuracy of controversial medical articles) quite a few times, which is why it's so disappointing that we haven't been able to more effectively address his objections to the guideline. MastCell Talk 21:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- I beg to differ. He's disruptive at MEDRS, including edit-warring. If his attitude here is an indication of the quality of his work, then I'm reviewing it with a fine tooth comb, because I find his attitude towards sourcing to border on the ridiculous. At this time, I do not trust him or his editing instincts. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 22:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- Some more thoughts. I still get the impression that Paul is more concerned that it was made a guideline over his objections rather than what his objects are specifically. Any reasonable medical editor would want this guideline. it's almost that the process upsets him rather than what the guideline is. That's problematic to me. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 01:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think his objections have been presented well by Paul, but I do understand them. His concern, as best I can tell, is that in the field of psychopharmacology in particular, many lower-profile review articles are written at the behest of the pharmaceutical industry; in some rather well-publicized cases, the reviews have actually been ghostwritten by the drug company, who then handle the submission and revision process while the author simply attaches their name and academic reputation. I think it's a reasonable concern that a reliance on such potentially biased review articles could degrade the quality of medical article somewhat. Unfortunately, the discussion has devolved to an unfortunate degree, and as you mention, there's been edit-warring. I guess all I'm saying is that I think Paul's heart is in the right place and we all probably agree more than we disagree, so it might be better to proceed from that starting point. MastCell Talk 16:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm glad to have a translation of his concerns, as I Just Have Not Had Time to wade through all of it and have been unable to decipher what his position is. If that is his concern, I can't disagree but, well, we unfortunately can't just do the research ourselves (that's OR, does he want to just write reviews himself from primary sources to overcome what occurs in the real world?). I will try to catch up over there tonight, but what a disruption from the mountain of work I'm falling behind on. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I don't want to put words in Paul's mouth, but that's my best understanding of his underlying concern. MastCell Talk 17:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm with SG here. Paul has far exceeded the wayyyy too long didn't read expectations. He needs to tighten up his writing, because if what you've said is true, then I never saw that. But again, he's cutting off his nose to spite his face. Maybe there's been a few pharmaceutical company misbehaviors, but would he rather have CAM cruft show up instead? And do have the investigative tools to figure out if and when a pharmaceutical company has done something wrong? Tell him to not write 47Mb of babbling--he needs to get to the point. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 17:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I think Kim Bruning is dealing with the TLDR babbling issue. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe. He just mentioned that he wants Una Smith to chime in. Paul may have his heart in the right place, but Una...different story. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 17:51, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I think Kim Bruning is dealing with the TLDR babbling issue. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm with SG here. Paul has far exceeded the wayyyy too long didn't read expectations. He needs to tighten up his writing, because if what you've said is true, then I never saw that. But again, he's cutting off his nose to spite his face. Maybe there's been a few pharmaceutical company misbehaviors, but would he rather have CAM cruft show up instead? And do have the investigative tools to figure out if and when a pharmaceutical company has done something wrong? Tell him to not write 47Mb of babbling--he needs to get to the point. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 17:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I don't want to put words in Paul's mouth, but that's my best understanding of his underlying concern. MastCell Talk 17:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm glad to have a translation of his concerns, as I Just Have Not Had Time to wade through all of it and have been unable to decipher what his position is. If that is his concern, I can't disagree but, well, we unfortunately can't just do the research ourselves (that's OR, does he want to just write reviews himself from primary sources to overcome what occurs in the real world?). I will try to catch up over there tonight, but what a disruption from the mountain of work I'm falling behind on. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think his objections have been presented well by Paul, but I do understand them. His concern, as best I can tell, is that in the field of psychopharmacology in particular, many lower-profile review articles are written at the behest of the pharmaceutical industry; in some rather well-publicized cases, the reviews have actually been ghostwritten by the drug company, who then handle the submission and revision process while the author simply attaches their name and academic reputation. I think it's a reasonable concern that a reliance on such potentially biased review articles could degrade the quality of medical article somewhat. Unfortunately, the discussion has devolved to an unfortunate degree, and as you mention, there's been edit-warring. I guess all I'm saying is that I think Paul's heart is in the right place and we all probably agree more than we disagree, so it might be better to proceed from that starting point. MastCell Talk 16:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed - I've seen Paul gene fighting the good fight (meaning improving the quality and accuracy of controversial medical articles) quite a few times, which is why it's so disappointing that we haven't been able to more effectively address his objections to the guideline. MastCell Talk 21:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Syracuse
Yeah, I meant to change that back to "urban" when I added the citation. Sorry about that! --ElKevbo (talk) 02:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. And I never bicker! :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 03:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yes you do. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 16:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- No I don't. I should revert you, and request a block. Meh. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 17:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yes you do. That's NPOV. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 18:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- No I don't. It's Duck Season. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Ya know. Some Los Angeles Orangeperson really should be watching over the Aaron Sorkin mess mentioned on my talk page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I actually have watched the article for a long time. The edit warring was odd, so I stayed out. Now I can swoop in!!!! And the West Wing is the best TV show ever. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Take it easy with Homely, OK? I think benefit of the doubt is called for, and I think Steve's moderated position is wisest for now. Did you see the AN/I thread (gosh, I hate digging in to ANI archives, but I'll find it if need be). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:51, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I know so little about the entertainment industry, I'm just copy editing. I'm not going to get involved in the sockpuppet/ANI/edit-warring stuff. Some of the writing is kind of non-FA-worthy. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Take it easy with Homely, OK? I think benefit of the doubt is called for, and I think Steve's moderated position is wisest for now. Did you see the AN/I thread (gosh, I hate digging in to ANI archives, but I'll find it if need be). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:51, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- I actually have watched the article for a long time. The edit warring was odd, so I stayed out. Now I can swoop in!!!! And the West Wing is the best TV show ever. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Ya know. Some Los Angeles Orangeperson really should be watching over the Aaron Sorkin mess mentioned on my talk page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- No I don't. It's Duck Season. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yes you do. That's NPOV. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 18:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- No I don't. I should revert you, and request a block. Meh. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 17:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yes you do. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 16:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
New Thought
I've started collecting relevant excerpts from reliable sources at User:Vassyana/New Thought. Feel free to make use of the material. Vassyana (talk) 15:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Request for Clarification on Pseudoscience Category Arbitration
Request for clarification on Pseudoscience Category implementation -- Let's get some expert guidance from the Arbcom on the use of this pejorative category tag.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 03:39, 5 October 2008 (UTC)