Misplaced Pages

User talk:Ephery: Difference between revisions

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.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:36, 13 December 2010 editEphery (talk | contribs)2,524 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:17, 25 February 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(18 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Draft stuff== ==People think I'm you==
Sorry to drop in on you like this, I know you haven't been active here in a while. But there's an AE thread open where people are accusing me of being you. Nobody has started an SPI about this, and I'm not sure what I can do to prove we're not the same person. I know you're not active now, but I hope you still see messages in your user talk.] (]) 22:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
I am going to draft some R&I related material here.


==Deletion review for ]==
===Progress on ] has been made as a result of mediation ===
An editor has asked for a ] of ]. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. <!-- This originally was from the template {{subst:DRVNote|PAGE_NAME}} ~~~~ --> ] (]) 23:30, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
I started on Misplaced Pages in June 2006 and first became involved with race and intelligence related controversies in the fall of 2009. A started in November 2009. Over the next 6 months, significant progress was made: compare of mediation with . Note how the new version was less then 1/2 the length (and now consistent with ]) and how numerous formatting problems, incorrect citations, spelling errors, poor grammar, lousy writing and so on were fixed. Of course, the new version is not perfect, but uninvolved editors that it was an improvement over the old one. Important issues that had been the source of much conflict over the years were resolved. , "Research into race and intelligence is not "fringe", some of the conclusions drawn from that research are highly contentious and need to be presented as such in the article." This was extremely helpful since it obviates the need for fruitless and repetitive debates about whether or not ] applies to the work of ] and others. I think that Ludwigs2 deserves a great deal of credit for the success of the mediation. Note, importantly, that no other editor volunteered to do the mediation after the first two mediators left the process. Critics of Ludwigs2 should recognize that the choice we faced was not between Ludwigs2 and some hypothetical perfect mediator but between Ludwigs2 and nothing. We all owe him our thanks.


==MfD nomination of ]==
===Progress on ] continues to be possible ===
], a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> ] (]) 18:01, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
True progress on ] and related articles seems to require a different editing procedure. Consider three concrete examples of such progress: the History section ( and ), the Debate Assumptions section ( and ) and the Lead . All these cases resulted in significant improvements to the article and featured widespread consensus among editors of very different viewpoints. Common factors: 1) Drafting was done on the Talk page, not in the article itself. Only after the section was complete was it moved into article space. 2) Drafting occurred over many days, allowing all editors time to register their opinions. 3) Comments from all were repeatedly solicited and incorporated. 4) The entire section was edited at once, thus allowing compromise over what to include, what to exclude and the relative proportions devoted to different material. Standard editing procedures have produced seemingly endless conflict and edit wars at this article for years. I think that this new procedure --- which I '''multi-day section-editing''' --- should be required going forward.


==Dispute resolution survey==
===Guidance is needed on applying ] to contentious claims made about living persons ===
{| style="background-color: #CCFFFF; border: 4px solid #3399cc; width:100%" cellpadding="5"
I suspect that many complaints about my behavior will center around recent disputes about material related to ]. The original debate is ]. Several similar debates have followed, summarized ]. Throughout, my behavior has been guided by my understanding of ]: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." The critical question, obviously, is just what "poorly sourced" means in this context. If a reliable source reports that person X says that Arthur Jensen wrote Extreme Claim A, do we just report that fact? Or should we demand to see evidence from Jensen's actual writings that he did, in fact, make Extreme Claim A? I would appreciate guidance from Arb Com on this situation. I argue that my interpretation has been made in good faith and, as evidence, cite the fact that uninvolved editors like Jimbo Wales, Off2riorob, and Rvcx were supportive of my position. (They may have changed their minds since then. See the for context.) Whether or not my deletions were right or wrong, it would be helpful if Arb Con were to provide guidance on this topic so that the policy is more clear going forward.
| ]

<big>'''Dispute Resolution – ''Survey Invite'''''</big>
==A list of sources that would allow for a thorough article to be written==
----
Here is a list of sources that, alone, would allow us to write a thorough and complete article on ]. Restricting the article to these sources is not the Misplaced Pages way, but the standard approaches have failed for this article for years. Why not try something different?
Hello {{BASEPAGENAME}}. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Misplaced Pages, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.
*{{citation | author = Ian J. Deary | authorlink = Ian Deary | title = Intelligence: A Very Short Introduction | year = 2001 | publisher = Oxford University Press | isbn = 0192893211}}
*{{citation | author = James R. Flynn | authorlink = James R. Flynn | title = Where Have All the Liberals Gone?: Race, Class, and Ideals in America | year = 2008 | publisher = Cambridge University Press | isbn = 0521494311}}
'''Please click to participate.'''<br>
*{{citation|first=John C.|last= Loehlin|authorlink=John C. Loehlin|first2=Gardner|last2= Lindzey|first3= J.N.|last3= Spuhler|title=Race Differences in Intelligence |publisher=W H Freeman & Co|year=1975|id=ISBN 0716707535}}
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.
*{{citation
----
|author = John Loehlin
<small>You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated ]. <span style="font-family:Verdana;">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 11:36, 5 April 2012 (UTC)</small>
|editor = Robert Sternberg
|title = Handbook of Human Intelligence
|page = 176-193
|year = 1982
|publisher = Cambridge University Press
|isbn = 0521296870
}}
*{{citation|first=N.J.|last=Mackintosh|authorlink=Nicholas Mackintosh|title =IQ and Human Intelligence|year=1998|publisher = Oxford University Press|id=ISBN 019852367X}}
*{{citation |author=Earl Hunt and Jerry Carlson |title=Considerations Relating to the Study of Group Differences in Intelligence | journal = Perspectives on Psychological Science| volume = 2 |year=2007 |pages = 194–213 | issue = 2 |doi=10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00037.x}}
*{{citation |last= Nisbett |first= Richard | authorlink=Richard Nisbett |title= Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count |publisher= W. W. Norton & Company |year= 2009 |isbn= 0393065057 | url = http://www.scribd.com/doc/29596219}}
*{{citation
|last = Neisser|first=Ulrich et al.|authorlink=Ulrich Neisser
|title = Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns
|journal = American Psychologist
|volume = 51
|pages = 77–101
|year = 1996
|url = http://www.psych.illinois.edu/~broberts/Neisser%20et%20al,%201996,%20intelligence.pdf
}}
*{{citation |author= Robert J. Sternberg, Elena L. Grigorenko, and Kenneth K. Kidd|year=2005 |title= Intelligence, Race, and Genetics |journal= American Psychologist|volume=60|issue = 1 |pages= 46–59|url=http://minority-health.pitt.edu/archive/00000515/01/Intelligence,_Race,_and_Genetics.pdf |doi= 10.1037/0003-066X.60.1.46 |pmid= 15641921 |ref= harv}}
*Special issue of ''Psychology, Public Policy, and Law'':
**{{citation|last=Rushton|first=J. P.|authorlink=J. Philippe Rushton|last2= Jensen|first2= A. R. |authorlink2=Arthur Jensen|year=2005|title= Thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability|journal= Psychology, Public Policy, and Law|volume= 11|pages= 235–294|url=http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf}}
**{{citation
|author = Robert J. Sternberg
|title = There are no public-policy implications: A reply to Rushton and Jensen (2005)
|journal = Psychology, Public Policy, and Law
|volume = 11
|pages = 295–301
|year = 2005
|url = http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Sternberg-commentary-on-30years.pdf
|doi = 10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.295
|issue = 2
|ref = harv
}}
**{{citation |author = Richard Nisbett
|authorlink = Richard Nisbett
|title = Heredity, environment, and race differences in IQ: A commentary on Rushton and Jensen (2005)
|journal = Psychology, Public Policy, and Law
|volume = 11
|pages = 302–310
|year = 2005
|url = http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Nisbett-commentary-on-30years.pdf
|doi = 10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.302
|issue = 2 |ref = harv
}}
**{{citation |author = Linda Gottfredson
|title = What if the hereditarian hypothesis is true?
|journal = Psychology, Public Policy, and Law
|volume = 11
|pages = 311–319
|year = 2005
|url = http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/2005hereditarian-hypothesis.pdf
|doi = 10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.311
|issue = 2 |ref = harv
}}
**{{citation |author = Lisa Suzuki and Joshua Aronson
|title = The cultural malleability of intelligence and its impact on the racial/ethnic hierarchy
|journal = Psychology, Public Policy, and Law
|volume = 11
|pages = 320–327
|year = 2005
|url = http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Suzuki-Aronson-commentary-on-30years.pdf
|doi = 10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.320
|issue = 2 |ref = harv
}}
**{{citation
|author = J. Philippe Rushton and Arthur R. Jensen
|title = WANTED: More Race Realism, Less Moralistic Fallacy
|journal = Psychology, Public Policy, and Law
|volume = 11
|pages = 328–336
|year = 2005
|url = http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen-reply-to-commentaries-on-30years.pdf
|doi = 10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.328
|issue = 2
|ref = harv
}}

Do any of these sources not belong? Are there other sources that are must additions?

== Submitting evidence ==

I noticed your edit summary - no, evidence doesn't have to be submitted in one piece. It does need to stay under the word limit and avoid personalizing things, but you're welcome to work on it as you have time. As things get started, usually the drafting arbiter will give a timeline or let people know when a proposed decision is in the works so that they can be certain to have their evidence together by that time. Hope that helps. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

:Thanks. ] (]) 18:50, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

== Traveling ==

I am on the road and will only have intermittent access until June 27. ] (]) 07:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

== Misplaced Pages Campus Ambassador at Harvard ==

Hi David, thanks for your interest in the Misplaced Pages Campus Ambassador role. More details about this role can be found at http://outreach.wikimedia.org/Wikipedia_Campus_Ambassador. Here is also a little bit more information; in a nutshell:

The Campus Ambassadors are crucial components of the Misplaced Pages . Volunteers in this position will be in charge of training and supporting the participating professors and students on Misplaced Pages-related skills, such as how to create new articles, how to add references, how to add images, etc. Campus Ambassadors will also help recruit other people on campus to contribute to Misplaced Pages articles, for example by setting up Misplaced Pages-related student groups and by organizing "Welcome to Misplaced Pages" social events. In general they will become known as Misplaced Pages experts on the university campus (in your case, on the Harvard University campus). The estimated time commitment for this role is 3 to 5 hours a week, possibly slightly more at the very beginning and very end of the semester. The Wikimedia Foundation will hold a three-day training for all Campus Ambassadors in August, and will continue to stay in contact with and offer full support for the Campus Ambassadors throughout the academic semester.

If you are interested in being a Misplaced Pages Campus Ambassador at Harvard University, I would like to send you the application form. What email address can I send this to? (Feel free to email me this info if you prefer: alin@wikimedia.org).

Thanks. I look forward to hearing back from you soon!

Annie Lin, Campus Team Coordinator<br>
] (]) 18:26, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

== Why less is not more ==
Do not feel beset over the suggestion that limiting sources for R&I, at least as a trial, has not received a vote of confidence. I believe the solution lies in appropriate representation of viewpoints as described in scholarship such as Hunt's and Carlson's&mdash;which is different from "embattled hereditarians versus embattled environmentalists." R&I is not a replay of the ]. More sources will provide the means to inject current scholarship while making for less whipping of authors for works published decades ago (while still accounting for their impact) and, most of all, telling a far richer account of the R&I subject matter. ]<small> ►]</small> 19:52, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

== WeijiBaikeBianji considers you an agenda account (I think). ==

I suspect that WeijiBaikeBianji's last comment ] is intended to be directed mostly at you, since you're the only editor who's recently removed a significant amount of content from the race and intelligence article. I thought I should point this comment out to you, in case you want to reply to it.

I notice from Cool Hand Luke’s comment ] that he considers the presence of agenda accounts to be the primary problem with this article, so whether you or I get lumped into that category may be a matter of more than just whether we have a derogatory-sounding moniker attached to us. --] (]) 15:42, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

== July 2010 ==
] Welcome to ]. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Misplaced Pages. However, please know that editors ] and should respect the work of their fellow contributors&nbsp;on ]. If you create or edit an article, know that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the ] to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-own1 --> ''Please don't try to generate a mini army, via canvassing off-wikipedia, to gain ownership and control of the ] of article content on wikipedia. It appears that you have been to draw like minded editors to backup your point of view and win content disputes.'' ]&nbsp;|&nbsp;] 16:26, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

] Please remember to ] when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-agf2 --> ''The is that your allegations of ] and requests for administrative action against an opponent in a content dispute were without any merit. Please try to be more cautious when making allegations and requesting admin action against other editors. ], when dealing with your fellow wikipedians will make yours and everyone elses edit experiences on wikipedia much more pleasant and productive.'' ]&nbsp;|&nbsp;] 16:38, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

=== Blocked for 24 hrs for disruptive editing ===
is the behavior currently under arbitration, which you appear to have felt free to continue without regard to what the pending Arbcom case ruling will likely say and without regard to existing Misplaced Pages policy.

As you are continuing behaviour which you have been repeatedly told by multiple persons is inappropriate, I have blocked you for 24 hrs.

It is unusual that any party in an Arbcom case is blocked for conduct during the case. However, that is because the vast majority of those who are involved in such cases cease most or all controversial behaviors during the duration of the case. There is naturally much higher scrutiny of everyone's actions during such periods. Please be advised that disengaging from content edits related to the disputes here would be a wise choice going forwards, until the decision is finalized. You appear not to be able to edit in the topic area without engaging in controversial edits, so simply avoiding it is a much safer approach.

] (]) 19:03, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

== Re: How to contact admin ==

I'm not an Admin. Since you are now blocked, the fastest way to contanct one is to just ask to be unblocked and then an Admin will contact you. If you visit the talk page of an Admin (or any editor for that matter), you'll see on the right hand side of your screen in the toolbax the "email this user" feature if the editor as enabled email. You can then communicate your request privately to the Admin. ] (]) 22:56, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

:Ah, darn it. Forgot to put this on when I blocked. The instructions for an unblock request are in the block template. My apologies for not including the block template at block time. ] (]) 23:12, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

<div class="user-block"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''24 hrs''' for repeated ]. You are welcome to ] after the block expires. If you would like to be unblocked, you may ] by adding below this notice the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our ] first. </div><!-- Template:uw-block2 -->
{{tlx|unblock|Although this block will soon expire, I would still like to appeal it because I believe that it is "not necessary to prevent damage or disruption". I will voluntarily avoid editing ] (the location of the edits that Georgewilliamherbert objected to) for the duration of the original block, but being blocked entirely prevents me from participating in a . Although various editors have complained about my edits elsewhere, no one has (I believe) accused me of disrupting those proceedings.}}

{| width="75%" align="center" class="notice noprint" style="background: none; border: 1px solid #aaa; padding: 0.5em; margin: 0.5em auto;"
|-
| valign="top" style="padding: 0.5em" | ]
| style="padding: 0.1em" |

'''Your request to be unblocked''' has been '''granted''' for the following reason(s):
<br><br>Although I haven't looked at the details of the dispute, I accept that you want to give evidence at the arb-com case, and will therefore unblock you. This is on the proviso as you stated, that you do not edit ], or any related pages, for the remained of the block period.

''Request handled by:'' &nbsp;—&nbsp;]&nbsp;(]/])

<small> '''Unblocking administrator''': Please check for <span class="plainlinks"> on this user after accepting the unblock request.</small>
<!-- Request accepted (after-block request) -->
|} |}
== File:Ephblog header.jpg listed for deletion ==
A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 00:56, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
==] of ]==
]


The article ] has been ] because it appears to have no references. Under ], this newly created ''']''' will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a ] that directly supports material in the article.
Thanks! ] (]) 12:33, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

== ] said he was unblocking me but the unblock does not seem to have worked ==

{{tlx|unblock| 2= ] said he was but the unblock does not seem to have worked. Could someone check to be sure that I am unblocked?}}
] (]) 12:50, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

: Done, there was an ] that I've cleared now. Please try again if you can edit now. ] ] 12:57, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

::Thanks! Now working. ] (]) 13:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
:::Sorry about that - I forgot to check for autoblocks.&nbsp;—&nbsp;]&nbsp;(]/]) 14:42, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

== Re-blocked ==

I have blocked you for a further 24 hours. As I stated above, I made it a condition of unblocking you that you did not edit ], '''or any related pages''', for the duration of the original block. However, you immediately edited ]. As before, you can use {{tl|unblock}} to appeal.&nbsp;—&nbsp;]&nbsp;(]/]) 15:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

{{tlx|unblock|1=I would like to appeal this reblock. This resulted from a good faith misunderstanding on my part. Instead of reading Tivedshambo's unblock statement closely, I skimmed it. (This is, obviously, my fault. But, in mitigation, I will note that my main focus was on figuring out how I could still be blocked when Tivedshambo claimed that I had been unblocked. Surely, I should not be punished for his mistake?) My initial appeal stated clearly that "I will voluntarily avoid editing Race (classification of humans) (the location of the edits that Georgewilliamherbert objected to) for the duration of the original block . . . " As soon as I read Tivedshambo's statement: "This is on the proviso as you stated, that you do not edit Race (classification of humans)," I assumed that I was good to go, as long as I did not touch that article. That was, after all, the proviso I stated. Of course, I should have immediately noted that Tivedshambo was '''insisting on a proviso much more extensive''' than the one that I had "stated." But I did miss that. Moreover, even if I had looked closely at that, it would not have occurred to me a book entry like ] (which I have had almost no involvement in) is actually a "related" page. (No one at the Arb Com case has, for example, suggested that an article like ] is part of the ] nexus of articles.

But the more important point, I think, is not this wikilawyering on my part. Look at the I made in ]. They are as innocuous as can be. Indeed, they are exactly the sort of editing that these articles need more of. Is this the sort of editing that Misplaced Pages admins seek to punish?

'''Summary: This block "is in fact not necessary to prevent damage or disruption." None of these edits has been damaging. None have been disruptive. The only purpose of this block seems to be punishment for a good faith mistake on my part.'''}}

===Note to reviewing administrators===
For my part, I'm inclined to assume good faith here. I admit to making a couple of mistakes: Firstly I didn't check for autoblocks, and secondly, ended up on the wrong page (due to my having too many windows open at once). And maybe I should have made the conditions clearer. However, I'll leave the unblock request up for second opinion. Feel free to revert the block if you feel it's justified.&nbsp;—&nbsp;]&nbsp;(]/]) 21:22, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
{| width="75%" align="center" class="notice noprint" style="background: none; border: 1px solid #aaa; padding: 0.5em; margin: 0.5em auto;"
|-
| valign="top" style="padding: 0.5em" | ]
| style="padding: 0.1em" |

'''Your request to be unblocked''' has been '''granted''' for the following reason(s):
<br><br>per above comment by blocking admin

''Request handled by:'' ] (])

<small> '''Unblocking administrator''': Please check for <span class="plainlinks"> on this user after accepting the unblock request.</small>
<!-- Request accepted (after-block request) -->
|}

Thanks for the unblock. And, Tivedshambo, no worries. I realize that blocking vandals and other miscreants is a thankless task and that being blocked from Misplaced Pages for 24 hours is hardly going to kill me. But, at the same time, I hope that blocking admins will take special care before blocking established editors. ] (]) 22:38, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

== My block is over ==


If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see ], or ask at the ]. Once you have provided at least one ], you may remove the {{tl|prod blp}} tag. '''Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced.''' If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can {{#ifexist:John Chandler (educator)|request that it be undeleted|]}} when you are ready to add one.<!-- Template:ProdwarningBLP --> ]<sup>]</sup> 23:33, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
I am making a good faith assumption that my blocked time is over since the original 24 hours has expired. I realize that the above reblock and unblock make this a somewhat difficult story to follow, but if anyone (or at least any admin likely to get angry) thinks that I am currently blocked anywhere, please tell me here. ] (]) 23:07, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


== ] ==
== Race (classification of humans) ==


{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I would like your input on ] (). Thank you. ] (]) 01:00, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692013717 -->
== 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 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.
:Provided. Thanks for asking. ] (]) 01:24, 15 August 2010 (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 --> --]<sup>]</sup> 00:44, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
==Anticipating ArbCom rulings==
==] concern==
Hi. Wikid77 here. At this point, there is little anyone can do to change the outcome. People have warned me to accept admin actions: be contrite, rather than demand justice; and apologize if they misunderstood, and promise to avoid conflicts in the future. I think, currently, most ArbCom events tend to topic-ban all people who could not reach consensus by themselves: it is typical for both sides of an argument to receive a 6-month topic-ban (or 3 months?), even for innocent people wikihounded or baited by troublesome users. Think of ArbCom by this false exaggeration: ''"If you couldn't reach consensus with devious troublemakers, then ''you'' are guilty of bothering us with facts about some topic we don't want to know"'' (false, but reveals the attitude). For most people, there is pressure to quickly decide a case, and move on to the next case (groan) they don't really want to handle.
Hi there, I'm ]. I just wanted to let you know that ], a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.


If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
Unfortunately, contrary to the content-focusd advice given to editors ("focus on content not contributors"), some ArbCom decisions tend to do the opposite: they hunt to ban contributors making slight accusations, and ignore "content" issues which require thinking about a topic. This gives the appearance of being the biggest "wiki-hipocrits" in the history of wikidom, but those people are just following procedure, not choosing to do the opposite action. Also, always think of how such people will react when being bothered by problems in your life. Most people really do not care, all that much. Stay away from troublemakers: there is little chance of getting a fair judgment. At this point, the term "wiki-justice" seems to be a myth.


You may request ] of the content if it meets requirements.
Now consider the future: if you can avoid troublemakers, then you can edit, or expand, dozens of articles about some other particular topic, but once you are confronted by ], it is a good time to switch subjects. Be happy to edit in hundreds of other topics, until you confront troublemakers in one of those topics, as well. In the long-term future, there are proposals to run ArbCom events which actually look at the contents of articles, decide NPOV balance, and set rules for how much can be said in each type of article, without actually banning anyone until they violate those new article-editing rules. Some people claim such events have happened, in limited ArbCom cases. However, currently, most ArbCom decisions seem to focus on restricting the people, rather than expanding articles in acceptable ways. I think of these years as the "Dark Ages of Misplaced Pages" where the focus was on blocking, threatening, or ostracizing editors with strong opinions, rather than a focus on setting plans for how people could work together on such articles, editing in acceptable ways. -] (]) 18:10, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at ].
Thanks for these words of wisdom. Much appreciated. ] (]) 20:06, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


Thank you for your attention. ] (]) 01:22, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
: Arbitration is not a reflection on your character or integrity, it is only an imperfect assessment of a situation and, unfortunately, a system which picks the "most guilty" explanation of anyone's behavior, protestations of assuming good faith (which I have no reason not to consider genuine) to the contrary. As far as I can tell, nothing I said at my own arbitration counted for a hill of beans. That is simply how the system works. I've chosen to sit out my 1 year topic ban by finding another subject of long-standing interest. Objectively, the "situation" is no better or worse at "Race and intelligence" and related than any other WP conflict I've witnessed. In some ways (being attacked just for showing up), it's worse, leading to the circumstance you find yourself in. There <u>'''is'''</u> life after topic bans and blocks; use the time to purge yourself of the toxicity. It's only when you're forcibly removed from a situation that you see how bad it was. The feeling of being wronged that you undoubtedly feel now will never improve; however, you will find yourself eventually thankful for the restoration of balance which could not have occurred otherwise. ]<small> ►]</small> 22:40, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
==Your draft article, ]==
::David.Kane, I agree with the above. It is easy to overlook all the time ''wasted'' by trying to fight other people, in limited areas. Instead, focus on the ] subjects: if the trouble centered on the races, then step-away 1 level to racially limited places: ] cities mostly white, ] cities mostly black, or Japan mostly Asian. Then step another direction: "]" around Africa's ], such as ], '']'', with genetic traits of the ] or ]s, or hoax ]. If avoiding human genetics, perhaps focus on the ] (with ]), or monkeys, such as ] or ] (source of bloodwork ]). If you want to avoid animal genetics, then perhaps focus on ], such as ]'s work mixing genetic traits of plants, or mutations with ] disease, etc. Some people shift to 10 articles about their hobbies, or the colleges their friends/brother attended, or favorite cars they liked, or just click ] article 15 times to find an interesting one. Once you focus on a broader scope, you might even wish you had changed subjects months earlier. Then, remember: people are trying to change policies so that, years in the future, disputes will be resolved by setting rules for how people can balance opposite opinions in articles, rather than how to ban the people with particular viewpoints. -] (]) 09:22, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
]


Hello, Ephery. It has been over six months since you last edited the ] submission or ] page you started, "]".
Thanks to both ] and ] for this advice. ] (]) 13:28, 20 August 2010 (UTC)


In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia ], the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply {{edit|Draft:Elimination of fraternities at Williams College|edit the submission}} and remove the {{tlc|db-afc}}, {{tlc|db-draft}}, or {{tlc|db-g13}} code.
==]==
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following is a summary of the remedies enacted:


If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at ]. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
*] are authorized for "]" and all closely related articles.
*The following editors are topic-banned from race and intelligence articles, broadly construed:
**] (by consent)
**]
**]
**]
*], who was indefinitely blocked as a result of an ] discussion during the case proceedings, is site-banned for 12 months. Until his ArbCom ban expires, he may only appeal his block to the Arbitration Committee, via the ]. After 12 months, he may choose to appeal the ban to either the Arbitration Committee or to the community.


Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages! <!-- Template:Db-draft-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ] (]) 11:12, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,
== 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.
'''<font color="navy">]</font>''' ''(<font color="green">]</font>)'' 23:00, 24 August 2010 (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 --> ] (]) 07:44, 1 July 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.
== DC and contributions ==


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 --> ] (]) 09:15, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Greetings! Please excuse this intrusion on your talk page, and allow me to invite you to participate in the newly-formed ] (] for short)! The goal of the team is to attract more and better contributions to the English Misplaced Pages, as well as to help support the fundraising team in our financial and editing contribution goals. We have lots of stuff to work on, from minor and major page building, to WikiProject outreach, article improvement, donor relations, and more—in fact, part of our mission is to empower team members to make their own projects to support our mission. Some of our projects only take a few minutes to work on, while others can be large, multi-person tasks—whatever your interest level, we're glad to have you.
== ] of ] ==
]


The article ] has been ]&#32;because of the following concern:
If this sounds interesting, please visit ] and sign onto the team. Even if there does not appear to be anything that really speaks out as being work you'd like to do, I'd encourage you to join and follow the project anyway, as the type of work we'll be doing will certainly evolve and change over time. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me, or ask on the ]. Regards, ]] ] 02:56, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
<blockquote>'''This initiative doesn't seem notable. THe article is mostly unsourced- two of the three sources are primary and one does not mention the subject.'''</blockquote>


While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ].
::As an aside, I'm also a local DC Wikimedian. We'd love for you to attend the next DC meetups. I'm specifically contacting you as you expressed interest in the Campus Ambassador position, and both the DC Wikimedians group and the Misplaced Pages Contributions Team have a lot of interest in working along with the Campus Ambassadors. You can reach me on my talk page, or by email at drosenthal@wikimedia.org with questions; I can't guarantee that I'll be checking back on your talk page often enough to hold a sustained conversation there. Regards, ]] ] 02:56, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ].
==Fair use rationale for File:Gaudino.jpg==
]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to ''']'''. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under ] but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to ] and edit it to include a ].


Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] <sub>]</sub> 15:13, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no fair use rationale-notice --> ] (]) 15:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)


== Could you weigh in on the removal of the hereditarianism section from Eyferth study? ==
== Result of a request at ] where your name was mentioned ==


Comments say it all. Thanks! ] (]) 03:11, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello Ephery. Please see of a request for enforcement of the Race and intelligence Arbcom decision. Though your name was mentioned, no action regarding you was taken. Your existing topic ban from R&I remains unchanged. Thank you, ] (]) 18:34, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:17, 25 February 2023

People think I'm you

Sorry to drop in on you like this, I know you haven't been active here in a while. But there's an AE thread open where people are accusing me of being you. Nobody has started an SPI about this, and I'm not sure what I can do to prove we're not the same person. I know you're not active now, but I hope you still see messages in your user talk.Boothello (talk) 22:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?

An editor has asked for a deletion review of How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. aprock (talk) 23:30, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Ephery/How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?

User:Ephery/How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ephery/How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement? and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Ephery/How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement? during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. aprock (talk) 18:01, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Ephery. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Misplaced Pages, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang 11:36, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Ephblog header.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ephblog header.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly 00:56, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John Chandler (educator)

The article John Chandler (educator) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Misplaced Pages policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Ronhjones  23:33, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Elimination of fraternities at Williams College for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elimination of fraternities at Williams College 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/Elimination of fraternities at Williams College until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. --Joshualouie711 00:44, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Elimination of fraternities at Williams College concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Elimination of fraternities at Williams College, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:22, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Elimination of fraternities at Williams College

Hello, Ephery. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Elimination of fraternities at Williams College".

In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages! Lapablo (talk) 11:12, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Williams College commencement speakers for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Williams College commencement speakers 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/List_of_Williams_College_commencement_speakers 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. OXYLYPSE (talk) 07:44, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Robert Gaudino for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert Gaudino 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/Robert Gaudino 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. OXYLYPSE (talk) 09:15, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Common Data Set

Notice

The article Common Data Set has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This initiative doesn't seem notable. THe article is mostly unsourced- two of the three sources are primary and one does not mention the subject.

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Reyk YO! 15:13, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Could you weigh in on the removal of the hereditarianism section from Eyferth study?

Comments say it all. Thanks! 40.131.178.46 (talk) 03:11, 21 February 2023 (UTC)