Revision as of 19:12, 11 February 2008 editRandom user 39849958 (talk | contribs)19,517 edits →I have had respect for you but now← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 16:29, 25 November 2021 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2)Tag: AWB | ||
(249 intermediate revisions by 34 users not shown) | |||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|} | |} | ||
==Invitation to CfD Category:Pseudoskeptic Target Discussion== | |||
== Are you really leaving? == | |||
I noticed that you have edited in related areas within WP, and so thought you might have an interest in ].] (]) 18:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
== Treatment techniques == | |||
Don't do that. Your always ], level-headed, and good-natured presence will be sorely missed on all sorts of articles. ] 01:34, 26 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
The ] section needs an expert on the subject. I hope you are interested in helping out in reaching ] status for ]. This is possible with the help of an expert. ] (]) 23:48, 28 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
:Glad to see you're back (are you back?) ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 23:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Request== | |||
== Your ] ] == | |||
Hiya, at the pseudosciences list, I realize that it's a hot topic, but unless there's a strong consensus to do so on the talkpage, it's probably not a good idea to be removing sourced information like this. You may wish to ''modify'' the information, but the citations themselves should probably be left in place. Thanks, --]]] 04:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Hi Elonka, good to see you're still here. I respect what you are trying to do. Sorry to get involved, I'll leave it up to you. -- ] ] 04:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
{| style="border:1px solid black; background:#efe8fe; padding:3px;" align=center | |||
:: Yes, was on vacation for awhile (Caribbean cruise, it was great!), and just got back last night. I'm still wading through my watchlist, and trying to sort out where I can best help. Do feel free to keep engaging at the pseudoscience list, I'm not trying to scare you off. :) All I'm asking is that you leave the citations in place, and perhaps try to modify the information ''from'' those citations. For example, perhaps create a new subsection on that page for certain entries, or rewrite them a bit? I'm not sure, I'm just trying to help avoid the "A reverts B, C reverts A, D reverts C, etc." edit wars. ;) Thanks for understanding, --]]] 04:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
|] | |||
| <div style="font-family:Verdana;">Good afternoon (] time); I have accepted a ] ] - requested by ] - to which you are listed as a party. Mediation has commenced at the ], where you are invited to participate. | |||
:::And you are doing a wonderful job as usual. I am sure that you will eventually get a good grip on it, but I'm afraid I don't have the kind of time it takes to deal with QuackGuru's loving little soul. If the bar for the inclusion criteria ever sinks so low as to include chiropractic, a profession that sees 10% of the US population in any one year, then it is too vague to clear the NPOV criteria for lists. If you raise that bar then it fails ], no matter what any quasi-reliable source says. Just doing my part. | |||
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me via ], ] or my ]; I will try to answer all your questions as fully as possible in so far as it does not compromise my ]. | |||
:::Did you do the Eastern cruise or the Western cruise? I've done both and loved each of them. I wanna go baaaackk!!! Though I was concerned about your situation last year, glad to see you fought through it. | |||
''Kind regards'', | |||
:::Thanks for your kindness. -- ] ] 04:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
:::: Nice to see two people whom I highly respect. Elonka, that might surprise you, chiroskeptic that I am, but Dematt is a man of integrity. Even when we disagree, and we do at times, we do it agreeably ;-) He has been the major factor in the expansion of the chiropractic article from a pitiful state to what it is today. A great Wikipedian! | |||
== Welcome back == | |||
:::: I am uneasy about the current dispute, since I'm somewhat split over the issue. The heading states that we can include the opinions of skeptics, but they are being kept out. The inclusion criteria are right in the heading, but PSCI is being applied. The problem is, we aren't placing it in the Category, just documenting that skeptics consider it to be pseudoscientific. | |||
I don't know if you remember me but you were a help to me when I first started out. I am still learning slowly but have gotten a lot better. I'm glad to see you back because you are an editor who is calm and has an open mind even if you do not agree. Again, I hope to see you around. --] 10:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::: OTOH, I also have qualms about including "chiropractic" as a whole, since it's a mixed bag. The parts of chiropractic that are generally considered pseudoscientific are three things: | |||
== List of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Schools in North America == | |||
::::* ] (VS) and | |||
I was hoping you had time to chime in ].--] 18:00, 18 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::* ], with its ]. | |||
:::: VS is still the philosophical (no VS, no excuse for the existence of the profession) and legal foundation of the profession (no treatment of subluxation, no payment from Medicare!), and that is problematic for chiropractic and its reputation in the scientific and skeptical community, since it's a pseudoscientific construct without anatomical basis. Only chiropractors (mostly straights) believe in it. Many are openly against it, but it would be suicidal of the profession to openly reject it. | |||
== Thanks! == | |||
:::: Ideally we should include those three concepts, and state that the first two are elements of chiropractic, and include vitalism by itself, since it is an element of many forms of alternative medicine, not just chiropractic. | |||
Thanks for your greeting. Hope all's well. -- <i><b><font color="004000">]</font></b></i>/<b><font color="990099" size="1">]</font></b> 20:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::: I'm tired of the wikilawyering that panders to the fringe, instead of fighting for an NPOV version that will allow inclusion. Changing the article's title will solve that problem. People can choose one side or the other. Either they will exploit the current title to support keeping fringe ideas out, or they will support an NPOV title to allow inclusion. BTW, these elements of chiropractic that should be mentioned aren't "Questionable science", but clearly PS. They are in the first two of the four ] criteria. | |||
== The next steps at ] == | |||
With the mediation halted, I have put together a compromise in the spirit of good faith ]. I know there are other steps of ] we can go through, including another attempt at mediation, but I am hoping we can all settle this amongst ourselves. I would appreciate your opinion on the compromise and/or your ideas of what the next steps may be. Thanks. -- <b><font color="996600" face="times new roman,times,serif">]</font></b> <sup><font color="#774400" size="2" style="padding:1px;border:1px #996600 dotted;background-color:#FFFF99">]</font></sup> 18:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::: One things is certain, no matter what we do, and no matter how well sourced, and even if ] himself appeared and admitted he had been one of the greatest quacks of all time, Levine2112 will appear and make sure that the word chiropractic is not allowed to stay on the page, even if he has to use socks and meatpuppets. There will never be peace there if the word is mentioned. The edit history has shown that to be the case. Only tight admin control and sanctions can prevent that. -- ] (]) 05:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
==RfM Stephen Barrett== | |||
A ] has been filed with the ] that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at ], and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to ]. '''There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.''' | |||
-- <b><font color="996600" face="times new roman,times,serif">]</font></b> <sup><font color="#774400" size="2" style="padding:1px;border:1px #996600 dotted;background-color:#FFFF99">]</font></sup> 23:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::::Hi Fyslee, thanks for the kudos. I know you are doing your best to be as neutral as you can and I do appreciate that, but you have to remember that pseudoscience is a pejorative and is a serious accusation. You can't create a list with 'the skeptical inquirer' as inclusion criteria as one of the accusers and expect it to ever be NPOV. That is why we require things like . So if you really want to work toward NPOV and credibility for wikipedia, work to correct the inclusion criteria and the rest will take care of itself. | |||
==Request for Mediation== | |||
{| class="messagebox" style="width:80%" | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
| | |||
|A ] to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, ]. | |||
::::::::''For the Mediation Committee,'' <span style="color:red;font-weight:bold">^</span>]<sup></span>]] | |||
:::::By the way, ] is not pseudoscience. All healers were vitalists until the early 20th century. Now when vitalists inject a spiritual being into the picture, it becomes religious, but that is not pseudoscience by definition. The new vitalists have migrated to ] - and that is all materalistic and uses organization as an explanation for the development of intelligence when reductionist concepts can no longer answer the questions of life. One of our very own past wikipedians ] is one of those, and actually has finished on the ''first'' model of how an emergent system might work showing how oxytocin will not result in lactation without suckling because the hypothalimus must receive the nerve stimulation from the alveoli before it will be primed to release the oxytocin. There is no way to have understood these processes in the days of DD Palmer, so yes they gave them spiritual elements. All people believed that. Innate intelligence has little scientific meaning today and I don't know any chiropractors that use the term (not saying there aren'a ny out ther), but can be thought of as a metaphor for those body functions that are controlled by the brain, which are most all as far as anyone knows. The degree that chiropractic has any affect on those functions is being studied. Is it going to show that 'chiropractic cures all ills' - No. And no-one says so. If you find any chiropractic organization that says so, let me know. Now are there chiropractors that think they can cure all ills - YES, and they drive us all crazy, but that does not mean that they are pseudoscientists, only crazy. | |||
<small><center>This message delivered by ], an automated bot account operated by the ] to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please ].</center></small> | |||
|} | |||
<div align="right">''This message delivered: 08:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)''.</div> | |||
:::::Thanks for lending me your ear. -- ] ] 06:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Thank you == | |||
== Hey, Dematt!! == | |||
I just want to say you were quite patient and helpful to me. You really are a very nice editor and fair in your responses. Keep up the great work! Please except this barnstar from me for you help. I hope I did it correctly, if not please correct it so it is properly done, still learning this. --]] 11:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
<big>Welcome back!!!!</big> ... and thanks for the barnstar! <span style="color:Purple; font-size:19pt;">☺</span>](]) 01:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
<blockquote> | |||
:Welcome back to The Other Place (tm) :-). BTW, can you get the necessary people over at the Other-Other Place to edit their Vit C article to make it more readible. It's long winded gibberish at the moment, almost like it's been run through Bablefish or something :-(. Ta ] (]) 11:04, 8 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
] | |||
Please except this barnstar from Crohnie, Dematt you deserve this. --]] 11:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
</blockquote> | |||
==ArbCom request for clarification: ]== | |||
A request has been made for clarification of the ArbCom case ] as it relates to ]. I'm leaving this notification with all editors who have recently edited the article or participated in discussion. For now, the pending request, where you are free to comment, may be found ]. regards, ] (]) 13:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Your welcome but you really deserve the barnstar for being so patient and helping me out. I will let you know what happens via email. --]] 11:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
== File:Chirocad 300dpi.jpg listed for deletion == | |||
== I was about to clear my page until == | |||
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}} <!-- Template:Idw --> ] (]) 22:45, 15 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
== NowCommons: File:Ddpalmer3.jpg == | |||
I was about to leave permanently and clear my pages until I saw the barnstar you left me. I don't do arguments very well and run from them. I thought things would be different here then on the net but I guess being attacked is going to happened no matter where I go. Thank you so very much for the barnstar. It actually brings tears to my eyes thinking someone took the time to think of me like this. Thank you very much, --]] 12:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
] is now available on ] as ]. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Misplaced Pages, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Misplaced Pages, in this case: <nowiki>]</nowiki>. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --] (]) 01:00, 26 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
<!-- ncnotifier --> | |||
==File permission problem with File:Chiropractic.JPG== | |||
:I need to ask you this: why does the treatment my son gets only last the day, at least it did the last treatment. There is a doc talking about continuing the treatment a bit longer and if it continues to be such short term help then he wants him so see a surgeon to fix it. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Of course you can email me about this. Thanks again for all you help, understanding and helping me understand chiropractic. --]] 16:12, 23 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
] | |||
Thanks for uploading ''']'''{{#if:|, which you've sourced to {{{source}}}.|.}} I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license. | |||
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either | |||
::That sounds like absolutely reasonable advice so far. The timing is about right to be looking to evaluate referral options if things don't work out. I'll email. ---- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 16:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
* make a note permitting reuse under the ] or another acceptable free license (see ]) '''at the site of the original publication'''; or | |||
* Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to '''''', stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter ]. | |||
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to ''''''. | |||
::Thanks, got it. Will get back to you as soon as I can. I'm really sick right now, a bug I think but it hard to tell a bug from Crohn's! :) --]] 19:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
If you believe the media meets the criteria at ], use a tag such as {{tlp|non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at ], and add a ] justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See ] for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. | |||
==miss you, too== | |||
saw your note on that talk page about CZ, and i miss you , too, Matt. I've been getting my site together- there is so much to do, and all the distractions of real life, to boot. Anyway, hope to work with you again someday, soon. ] 02:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following . '''Files lacking evidence of permission may 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 permission-notice --> ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 01:45, 22 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
answered on my talk ] 03:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
== |
== FICS == | ||
Thanks for fixing my reference :) I'm hoping to move the article over to mainspace soon, but the admin that deleted it last month says he still thinks it fails ], so I'm going to try to dig up a few more references if possible. | |||
I have taken the liberty of nominating you to do a little job. Read this section and see my nomination at : | |||
Good to see you are back - I myself have taken several months off, and am not sure how much I'll be on here. | |||
] (]) 03:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Also, I don't know how much I'm going to be around, would you mind watchlisting the FICS article? ]... thanks! ] (]) 04:14, 9 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
== invite == | |||
* http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Chiropractic#Ernst -- <i><b><font color="004000">]</font></b></i>/<b><font color="990099" size="1">]</font></b> 20:52, 30 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
{{tb|Drsjpdc}} ] (])<sup>]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-3.2ex;">]</sub> 22:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
I made a little change, but this is a sticky one. If we lower the bar, that opens it up to a large amount of data both pro and con that likely will not change the net result but could end up dragging on like the SB pages ;-) -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 02:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
==File source problem with File:BJPalmer2.jpg== | |||
==Citizendium article on Extinction (geology)== | |||
] | |||
Hi Matt, | |||
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged. | |||
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created . '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''' per Misplaced Pages's ], ]. If the image is ] and ], '''the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC)''' per ] criterion ]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] (]) 10:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
Thanks for your note on ] concerning the errors in Citizendium's Extinction article. I'm glad people are working on fixing the issue. I see they have already the italics and spelling. However, the problematic ''Edmontosaurus''-died-from-lack-of-conifers theory is still in the article! The source supposedly cited for that information, , does not mention either conifers or ''Edmontosaurus'' anywhere in the text. It's a very odd claim, and a false citation. | |||
== AfD - Chiropractic controversy and criticism == | |||
The thing that worries me the most about errors like this is that there doesn't seem to be an easy way to report errors to Citizendium. Few editors seem to have listed e-mail addresses, the forum approval system doesn't seem to work well (in my experience), and the one e-mail I did get sent off did not receive a prompt response. I realize since Citizendium is new, there are many bugs that need to be worked out, but there should be an easy way to contact the site in the case of errors. Thanks for your attention. | |||
== ] nomination of ] == | |||
Best wishes and happy editing, | |||
<font color="#0000FF">]</font> 19:26, 3 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>An article that you have been involved in editing, ], has been listed for ]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at ]. Thank you.{{-}}Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.<!-- Template:Adw --> - I am notifying you because you participated in the original AfD. ] (]) 20:01, 16 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
:I agree with you on all of these counts. Our challenge is more with the manpower in creating the software variables to help us allow people to do this. There has been lots of discussion, but the changes happen slowly! I can't wait till we get them all going! -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 20:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== |
== Harvey Lillard == | ||
Hello :) I saw you're quite the expert on chiropractic and wanted to tell you that I'll be creating an article about Harvey Lillard these days. I'll write it ] first- if you ever see something not right I'd be more than grateful if you could tell me about it. Regards! --] <sup><big>]</big></sup> 16:44, 4 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
Hello Dematt, | |||
==File source problem with File:Harvey Lillard.jpg== | |||
thank you for welcoming me into the community. I was interested in the article on Chiropractic. Right now I am living very busy days....I hope to have some time in the future to bring up a conversation on some improvements I think can be made there. For now, I don't have the time to engage in ...debates. Frankly...too much for me right now. But, I hope you are still here then. Thank you. | |||
] | |||
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged. | |||
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created . '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''' per Misplaced Pages's ], ]. If the image is ] and ], '''the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC)''' per ] criterion ]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] (]) 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
==File source problem with File:Harvey Lillard.gif== | |||
] | |||
] | |||
Sept 7 | |||
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged. | |||
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created . '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''' per Misplaced Pages's ], ]. If the image is ] and ], '''the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC)''' per ] criterion ]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] (]) 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
==Citizendium (again)== | |||
Hi Matt, | |||
==File source problem with File:Innate Drawing2.jpg== | |||
This is ] again. I'm so sorry to bother you with Citizendium stuff on your Misplaced Pages account, and I realize this could quickly become annoying. I know you are not the "Citizendium complaints department" and you are busy writing articles for more than one encyclopedia. Still, there's just no way for a non-editor to correct errors on Citizendium (no-one has contact information, or if they do, they've already left the project; the forum registration system doesn't work for dubious types like myself, etc). So I come to you again. Sorry in advance for any stress these corrections cause. The last thing I want to do is offend or upset you. You've been quite responsive and helpful. | |||
] | |||
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged. | |||
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created . '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''' per Misplaced Pages's ], ]. If the image is ] and ], '''the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:11, 13 September 2010 (UTC)''' per ] criterion ]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] (]) 17:11, 13 September 2010 (UTC) | |||
There's a major problem with . It's a wonderful article, very well-written, and the author is to be commended for including discussion of the important role the ] played in early U.S. television history. DuMont's prominent role is not well-remembered today, leading to entire books on the history of television to omit it entirely. I was pleasantly surprised to see it included in the Citizendium article. However, there are some errors that should be corrected before this article "goes live" (or whatever the term is). The article states ''With the collapse of the DuMont network in 1959, its three main affiliates were absorbed into ABC, which remained the smallest of the three networks througout most of this period.'' None of that is correct. | |||
== ] == | |||
DuMont collapsed in 1955-1956 (cancelled most programs on April 1, 1955; final broadcast, '']'' August 6, 1956). Even though some sources mistate the dates, the 1955 and '56 dates are supported by the most reputable sources: '''', (Bergmann 2002); '''', (Weinstein, 2004); ''Total Television'', (McNeil, 1996); and . I'm not aware of any source listing ''1959'' as DuMont's closure date. | |||
Hi Matt, | |||
DuMont's three owned and operated stations (WABD, WTTG, and WDTV) were certainly ''not'' absorbed into ABC: WDTV was bought by Westinghouse; WABD and WTTG became independent stations until purchased by FOX in 1985/6. DuMont's strongest affiliate stations, WGN-TV in Chicago and KTTV in Los Angeles, never affiliated with ABC. There was no absorbing of DuMont's major affiliates into ABC, and no source that I'm aware of states this. I have eight books on DuMont on my shelf, including Ted Bergmann's. Since Bergmann was an exec at DuMont, he would certainly know what happened to the company at the end. | |||
The article states ''At the same time, the introduction of UHF frequencies added a new venue for smaller, independent television stations.'' Actually, UHF was never on a par with VHF, and being located on a UHF station only guaranteed a station would remain both small and independent, as the three post-50s commercial networks avoided affiliations with UHF stations because UHF station turnover was so high. The sentence isn't wrong, but the idea that the introduction of UHF created a "venue" should be avoided entirely: most UHFs from 1952 to the 1980s, even well-funded ventures, quickly folded. Also, in the photo caption, DuMont is spelled "Dumont"; that should also be avoided (Weinstein, 2004: "A note on spelling", in the introduction). | |||
Matt, if you can somehow get these errors fixed, I would greatly appreciate it. I know you are quite busy with Citizendium duties and may not be able to respond immediately. I think Citizendium's television article is off to a great start, and would like to see it improved further. I had considered signing up for membership, but the personal information requirement, along with my duties on Misplaced Pages, preclude that. Best wishes and happy editing, <font color="#0000FF">]</font> 21:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:No problem Firsfron, I can take a look. I am not familiar with the article itself or who is working on it (if anyone at this point). If not, I can make the changes myself - it is a wiki ;-). I'm sure if anything is incorrect, and someone actually knows this stuff as well as you, they will change it back, then we can go from there. I am 'young' enough to remember that my television only went to channel 13 and when UHF came out, we could only wish we could see what they were watching on UHF :-). Let me know if I get anything wrong. | |||
:You do know that you do not have to publish your CV, just let the constables see it. You do have to use your real name though - but if you are a hit man or something they will let you sign up with a pseudonym :D I think you would be a great addition to our small but growing virtual world. You can stay here, too! ---- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 02:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
::Okay, I made some changes, see what you think. ---- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 02:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::Thank you, Matt. The are, in my opinion, quite good. Thank you very much for your time. If you need exact page numbers for book citations, I can certainly provide those as well, though I'm at work right now and will have to go home to get them, and my (admittedly limited) understanding is that Citizendium frowns on Misplaced Pages's inline citation craze. I'd love to see Citizendium become a well-respected source of information, and it's quick responses like yours which make me think Citizendium is coming along quite well. Clearly, someone cared for this article; things like the old DuMont advert add a beautiful touch. From what I can tell, though, the main editor involved in the creation of the article has since left Citizendium and will not return. If you hadn't intervened, this article would still contain the mistakes, and possibly would for the forseeable future. | |||
:::Your comment about being young when UHF came out ('52 when it was established, '64 when it was manditory on US TV sets) makes me think you must be quite 'young' indeed! I certainly don't remember it, but I do remember only getting four channels for many, many years. When my TV started picking up a low-quality UHF FOX signal back around 1989, I thought it was some sort of a miracle! | |||
:::Thanks for the invite to Citizendium; I continue to consider it. Thanks again for all your assistance. I promise not to darken your talk page with further Citizendium critiques. Best wishes and happy editing, <font color="#0000FF">]</font> 03:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::I firmly believe that we continue to grow as long as we are learning, and begin dying as we stop the learning process. I think it's impossible to learn "everything" about ''any'' subject. I'm certainly not an expert (on anything, really), but I know mistakes when I see 'em! At least on a couple of entirely obscure subjects. ;) <font color="#0000FF">]</font> 03:42, 8 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Temporary block == | |||
Really, you've been here long enough to know better - don't make ] violations of ]. I've given you a 31 hour block, you seem sensible enough, so just don't do it again. ] <sup>]</sup> 00:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
Adam, I am more surprised at you? What makes you think I am trying to make a point? Pasteur, Lister and Semmelwies were all called quacks in their day. I have placed the reference, and there are more. Anyone who knows the history of medicine is aware of this. It is not a bad thing, it is a neutral thing. You have to keep in mind that Pasteur and Lister were chemists, the doctors of the day were very much put off by them; they called them quacks (and worse). That is common throughout history. It is not saying they are quacks, it was saying that they were "notable people that were called quacks".. See what I mean? I think you assumed I was calling them quacks, but it is quite the opposite. Please reconsider and let the collaboration process work. I am sure if I said something wrong, it will get worked out. ---- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 01:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Well... you didn't do a very good job at justifying them (e.g. there was no mention in the text itself of why they would be considered quacks, or even that they were considered quacks) And the addition was, at least, poorly thought-out. But, well, if it was just a somewhat ill-thought out edit, I can't say any of us haven't had those. You must admit, though, that at the least they looked extremely out of place. | |||
:Anyway, I could pontificate a long time, but I suspect you'd rather I get to the unblocking. ] <sup>]</sup> 02:02, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
::Thank you Adam, If you click on the edit under that section in the ] article, you will see a commented out section that the previous authors of the stable version gave instructions about what to put in that section. Apparently I was not supposed to put the reason in.. so that the reader can decide. I can see how it would look strange. Maybe this should be clarified or something? | |||
::Anyway, I am much abliged, but it is time for me to call it a night for now. Thanks for reconsidering, I owe you one ;-) ---- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 02:10, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::I fo apologise: it's just that there's no real setup for it in the article, and so... well, I worked on various alternative medicine articles. Those are two of the greats of germ theory. Believe it or not, a lot of the alternative medicine proponents reject germ theory in favour of their preferred vitalist theories. And adding germ theory proponents to a list like that that includes a few alternate medicine proponents is just the ] violation some of the editors I've worked with would make on seeing a favoured quack in a list like that. | |||
:::See what Misplaced Pages does to your faith in humanity? Awful, I swear! ] <sup>]</sup> 02:17, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::Just to insert my 2 cents: there are plenty of editors of all stripes on alt-med topics who are probably richly deserving of a ] block, but Dematt's not one of them. He's always been a solid contributor, and I'm sure any appearance to the contrary was an unforunate misunderstanding. Glad to see it's sorted out. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 03:56, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::::I was also shocked to see "blocked" on my watchlist. I'm glad it was all straightened out. :/ <font color="#0000FF">]</font> 05:15, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::::: Hi Dematt, I too was shocked by this block esp. with you going out of your way to help me and m son. Is there anyway to remove the histories of this block to give you back a clean slate on the block log? I just think it's fair to have them removed since it was a communication problem. I find you to be very honest and you also listen to others and are fair to try to keep NPOV in mind. I just think it should be removed if possible. I'll send up another update as soon as I can. Again, thank you for helping me understand chiropractic protocols. --]] 12:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::::::I'd support this, as it was a misunderstanding. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::::::: Definite support. Dematt isn't the type to make a POINT vio. He's a very solid editor and I would definitely support him if he ever chose to be an admin. BTW Adam, I didn't know you were an admin. How about putting something on your user page to indicate that a bit more clearly. -- <i><b><font color="004000">]</font></b></i> / <b><font color="990099" size="1">]</font></b> 15:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
Thank you Adam! Off to work for me. I hope the change gets made soon. Thanks again, --]] 13:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:There isn't any way to "purge" the block log; it's pretty much indelible. The best approach at this point is just to note that it was a misunderstanding, as exemplified in the unblock summary, and perhaps save a permalink to this discussion - that way, in case it should ever come up again, you can point people here to get the context. Every now and then I think the developers are asked to implement a way to clear a block log, but I think it's always been rejected as too easily abused. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 15:51, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:: I can understand their point, but another possibility would be to a enable <s>strikethrough<s> and accompanying explanation and links.-- <i><b><font color="004000">]</font></b></i> / <b><font color="990099" size="1">]</font></b> 16:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
Wow, thanks everybody. I am totally touched by all the support, thank you all for making my day! I'm not worried about the block log. When you play with fire, you're bound to get burned occasionally. Adam was doing what he thought was best and lord knows this stuff gets complicated quickly. So no harm, no foul. I'll make sure an use the talk page next time;-) ---- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 00:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
:BTW, it looks like my IP is still blocked, so I have a few hours left. See ya soon. ---- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 00:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
==Help with Sockpuppet investigation?== | |||
Re: ], ]. See . I'm not sure how to approach this sockpuppet report. Levine will likely not participate in any informal discussion on the issue. I think TheDoctorIsIn should have a chance before a formal report is written. Other suggestions? --] 17:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
:I'm not sure what I would do in your case, either. Just be careful cause it looks like you are harrassing both of them. Aren't there ways for admins to find these things out? -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 18:01, 5 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
::If you want to suggest ways to reword what I've written, please do. I'm going forward with my next step in this, to ask for help in a meatpuppet investigation. I don't think TheDoctorIsIn is a sock (the same person using different accounts) of Levine2112. However, I think his edits justify a sockpuppet investigation as a meatpuppet. --] 18:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
::] --] 18:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::I think if you think there is a meatpuppet, then you should just request an admin check it out. I would probably ask MastCell. -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 02:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Good morning, at least where I am! :) == | |||
I just wanted to pop in and say hello. I appreciated your help about how Chiropractic care for my son. Unfortunately it didn't work for him and he has gotten so bad that probably by the end of this week he will be referred to a neurosurgeon to get an opinion about the two ruptures in the mid part of his back. I have to admit, I think this is a good step for him to do. He has been in pain since leaving the army in 2002 and is way past do to feeling better. He suffers miserable these days. :( | |||
I have to say though, the Chiro he saw could never 'adjust that part of his back'. The muscles fought it and then the spasms he gets went crazy. The massage part though did help ease this for a little while. I did learn and understand a lot from you about what this Chiropractor was trying to do and I appreciate all the help. You are a very kind and patient person. I hope you have a wonderful day. --]] 11:47, 20 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
PS: Feel free to email me if you would like.--]] 12:02, 20 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
Hi CrohnieGal, good to hear from you. It sounds like you followed a perfectly rational approach to your sons condition and surgery is your next step. I do hope he finally gets some relief. There is nothing more miserable than back pain. Let me know how everything goes!!! In fact I want a play by play, even the specific name of the procedure they perform, okay? Just one question.. did the chiropractor refer him to the neurosurgeon or did he have to look for one on his own? -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 01:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
:Hi, Neither, his pain management dr is taking it to the next steps. I will email you when I know something for sure. Thanks,--]] 12:38, 21 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
:I wanted to clarify the above that I said. He is on a HMO which requires referrals which in his case is very difficult to get from his primary. His pain doc sent him for an MRI of his ankle which is the cause of his back problems, 9+ months on crutches which the back problems were called "crutch leaning injuries". The last that was done, also sent by the pain doc, was a test with needle in different locations, EMG I think it was called but could be wrong with the name of this. Everything was going as expected for over an hour until the final needles went into the mid of his back. The tester said he went of the charts. This area is where he has the most damage, 2 or 3 damaged disks and lots of acute pain. On Thursday we both see the pain doc (I have been seeing the pain doc for around 4 years do to acute chronic pain issues from my many surgeries for Crohn's.) We both trust this doc immensely. The tester tried to explain but then just said that our pain doc would connect the dots for him. So, the next step will probably be med adjustments (maybe) and a referral for an opinion from a neurosurgeon. The doc was saying last month that because things have gotten so bad with his ankle, MRI showed it needed cleaning out) and the back pain is not controllable very well that the neurosurgeon he will see will be doing the kind of surgery less evasive, kind of like a key hole surgery. The surgery is supposed to be something like adding something like cement to stop the problems; at least this is the best analogy I can think of. My son is to the point that he is more than ready for the surgery, he wants and needs something to be done to get some sort of relief to get back to life again. This is the best I can explain right now but I will email you and let you know how the appt on Thursday goes. --]] 14:06, 21 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
::I see on the Chiropractic article that there is a big discussion about whether adjustment are safe. Well, in case you are interested, his Chiropractic said that adjusting the mid back 'could possibly and most likely' cause big damage to his spine with adjusting it and said massage would be the better option. I know that this is just a testimony from me but I am sure someone could find citations stating this. Also, this Chiropractor was not against pain management and drugs, he just didn't like the amount my son was taking to try control his pain. He was very open and honest about how he dealt with Chiropractic problems. Like I said I don't know if this means anything or is helpful but I thought I would let you know. I lurk this article to see if there is anything I am missing to help my son. --]] 14:17, 21 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::Good feedback, it sounds like your son has some good doctors. I am glad to hear that the chiropractor knew when not to manipulate. That is the kind of thing I am interested in hearing from the 'real world'. We read so many different things, I wonder how others treat. Keep me in touch, and I would love to see a icture of that MRI of the midback if you ever figure out how to email one:-) -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 01:25, 22 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::Good morning, I wouldn't have a clue on how to send you the MRI. Some of these kinds of test come with a CD but unfortunately this one didn't. --]] 11:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::Hi again, I can ask my son about this. He has had many, and I mean a lot of MRI's to the mid back and upper neck. The neck disks are dried out, can't remember the right terminology. One suggestion I can make for you is if you have a patient that you want to do an MRI on, do the one in the tube, not the stapped in sitting one. That one hurt him for days! --]] 11:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
==AfD nomination of ]== | |||
]An article that you have been involved in editing, ], has been listed for ]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:adw --> —] (]) 19:42, 17 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Happy holidays! == | |||
You are a very nice person and I remember the help and support you gave me. I just want to wish you a very happy and healthy holiday. May 2008 bring you much happiness. --]] 17:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Happy Healthy New Year! == | |||
It is nice seeing you posting. I just want to wish you a very Happy and Healthy New Year! You were very helpful to me in the past and I just want to again say thank you. Some things have changed for this year with him. If interested drop me a line. --]] 11:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
==A question about Quackwatch== | |||
I wonder if you would consider looking at this section, its subsections. I am hoping to get some advice on how to move this discussion forward. Thanks. ] (]) 01:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Hi Anthon01, that looks pretty complicated. Give me a chance to absorb what has been said and I can at least give you my 2 cents, which is worth about 2 cents ;-) Welcome to WP! -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 02:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Okay Anthon01. It looks to me as though the Pharmacy source is an attempt to provide its readers with an unbiased evaluation of websites. It appears verifiable and reliable to me as an opinion piece. Having said that, I do think it would be POV to include only the limitations without some of the praise. Crohnie makes a good point about it being from 1999, but then I guess you would have to reconsider the "good" articles that were from before 2000 as well. Since this is an opinion piece, attribution is necessary to have it included I think. At this point, I don't think any of the suggestions have nailed it, yet, but theoretically you are getting closer; provided everyone embraces the idea of an encyclopedia that includes rather than deletes. -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 02:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
:Hi, I think that if any of the articles shows that changes were already made like the 'Pharmacy' then they too should be removed. If an article is out dated then it shouldn't be in the article, in my opinion, since it would be false information. I dont' remember any of the other articles being so blatently wrong and outdated as this one is, but I haven't read them for awhile now. But I do agree that picking just one section of the Pharmacy source goes against ] and ] and probably some more policies. Of course this is just my opinion, but I think more time is needed to allow comments from other editors who edit this article too. --]] 11:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
:: Dematt: Thanks for taking a look. As to praise, are you talking primary(from the author) or secondary (from another source that is retold by the author)? Could you point to an example of praise the you see in the article? I don't see any praise coming form the reviewer himself. From my view, the review is written form a NPOV. Some editors have suggested that it is a ''positive'' article. I see it as a neutral article with some criticism. '''Regarding attribution,''' I believe the text already attributes it to the reviewer. The text states "Bao-Anh Nguyen-Khoa PharmD discussed two articles from Quackwatch of particular interest to pharmacists." Is that inadequate? | |||
:: Crohnie: The date of an article doesn't make it false. There are 152 references in the ] "featured article" and about 50 of them are 1999 or earlier. That is one third of the references. Would you advocate for their removal? ] (]) 15:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
::: I am pretty much one who "embraces the idea of an encyclopedia that includes rather than deletes." Speaking in principle here, and not just about this subject, the age of the references is immaterial unless other newer references show that the previous ones are outdated and wrong. IOW using one V & RS to properly determine the quality (or now only "former" quality) of another V & RS. That way it isn't editorial inclinations or POV that makes the decision based only on the age of the reference. Some very old references can still be of value. It just depends on the subject and what the reference is used for. -- <i><b><font color="004000">]</font></b></i> / <b><font color="990099" size="1">]</font></b> 15:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::Well I think that the update on QW shows that it is out dated, thus it is no longer correct or notable. I also believe that some older articles can be included as long as there is no new information showing that the information is incorrect. --]] 17:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::::Another thing I would like to ask Anthon, why is this so important to you? --]] 17:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Agree that the Pharmaceutical article appears to be a neutral exchange of information intended for pharmacists as a review of the web sites that concern them. Anytime I use a reference, I work hard to leave the reader with the 'intent' that the author was trying to convey. I think this article was trying to convey QW in as much a neutral light as possible. Yes, he states that there are limitations, but if you notice, he is not saying the site was bad - only that it could be better "if". Having said that, I see no reason why the article cannot be used. I see no reason why the list of limitations that he noted can't be integrated into the QW article as these are verifiable facts/opinions about the site... good or bad, every site has them. If we were writing about the chiroweb site, we would expect someone to note that it was written by chiropractors... and they would be correct, good or bad. The trick is to make sure that we don't write it in such a way that it looks as though we think that is good or bad. Leave that to the reader to decide. It doesn't matter whether you or I think Stephen Barrett writing all the articles is good or not. To some, that is great, to other's it's not. We just state that he does. | |||
As far as 'out of date'.. if the site has improved since then.. and we have verifiable information that says so, then it would be essential that we quote that source as well. Then decide whether the two POVs are worth including.. if not drop them out altogether through consensus. | |||
There is a lot more to this, but rather than telling things that you probably already know, let me know if I've answered any of your concerns. | |||
-- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 21:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks Dematt, I think that is an excellent way to look at things. --]] 22:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
:: Crohnie, I think I've mentioned this to you before, and I'll say it again, Dematt is worth listening to. He balances things in a good way, which is the NPOV way. Thanks Dematt. (Travelling again. Why don't friend's PCs save my password?...;-) -- <i><b><font color="004000">]</font></b></i> / <b><font color="990099" size="1">]</font></b> 03:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::I agree, Dematt has been helpful to me in many ways. I will always listen to what he has to say as he says it because he actually cares. --]] 11:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::::PS:I think your friend's computer probably has cookies blocked. I have this problem sometime when I use my son's computer! :) --]] 12:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
==Oh my goodness!== | |||
Happened to be editing and noticed -- one of the nicest wiki-things that's happened to me in a long time! You are too kind! Or, I should say, takes one to know one. ;-) Happy New Year, btw! I'm glad you stayed on WP, too; it's got some major problems, but (a) fighting the good fight and (b) picking one's battles, and of course (c) trying not to see it as a "fight" at all, can make a big difference. Thanks man! cheers, ]<sup>(])</sup> 04:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
The pleasure has been all mine. I'm sorry I don't have the time to follow through on some of our discussions sometimes, but it is usually because you have already said everything better than I could. If you would ever like to hear my opinion, drop a note here and I will take a look. I can't promise you that I will agree all the time, but I also know that is not what you are looking for. Don't forget the 'happy' in Happy editing! -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 05:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
===Apology=== | |||
Dematt you have still not apologised to me for running off an erroneously claiming I had broken the 3 revert rule. As a simple matter of courtesy and as a demonstration of good faith I hope you can bring yourself to make the apology. I am relaxed about this and realise mistakes happen. I make them to, but an apology would show what you are made of.] (]) 09:41, 27 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
:Hi Mccready, I'm thinking you might be mistaking me for someone else. I don't think I have ever accused anyone of violating the 3RR rule. You must be thinking of Hughgr . ---- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 16:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
If it was Hugh I apologise to you. All you chiros look the same to me :-) ] (]) 08:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
:I accept the apology and appreciate the compliment, but I think Hughgr is probably much better looking ;-) -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 18:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
==Question== | |||
Hi Dematt: I notice that the Pseudoscience category is not on the Chiropractic page. I wondering how you were able to keep it off that page and whether you consider it appropriate on the homeopathy page? Thanks. ] (]) 03:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Anthon, keep an eye out here while I look into your question.. more later. -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 18:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
: Hi, I have no intention to rush you. Just meant to be a reminder just in case you forgot. Thanks again. ] (]) 15:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
Just butting in here and giving my own POV on that one. I think it would be improper to apply the label (and category) to the Chiropractic article as a whole. It is applied, even by chiropractic V & RS, to certain aspects of chiropractic, and I am for doing that, but not the whole profession. It just happens to be an unfortunate fact that the legal and philosophical foundation of the profession (]) is also correctly considered a pseudoscientific belief, but chiropractic is far more and too complex a matter to glibly label it all "pseudoscience", although many, including myself, might in a weak moment do it because VS is so all-pervasive in the subject in every way. It's not totally fair to many chiros who are diligent, intelligent, honest, and are helping people as best they can. | |||
Here is one chiropractic source on the subject: | |||
* | |||
:Joseph C. Keating, Jr, PhD, professor at the Los Angeles College of Chiropractic and notable historian of chiropractic, warns of pseudoscientific notions that still persist in the mindsets of some chiropractors | |||
This is also interesting and no doubt painful reading for many chiropractors, whether they subscribe to VS or not. | |||
BTW Anthon01, you should know that I hold Dematt up on a pedestal as a model Wikipedian and have great respect for him. He has taught me many things, including to show more respect for chiropractors. He has not lived in vain! -- <i><b><font color="004000">]</font></b></i> / <b><font color="990099" size="1">]</font></b> 17:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
:Wow. I am learning a lot today. Forgive me but I have often found your comments to be extremely dismissive of alt-med to an extreme. You are certainly seeming more balance in your view. But regarding your editing behavior on chiropratic, is it based on policy influenced by your POV or policy? ] (]) 17:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
:: When I first came here and didn't know or understand policies, it was definitely based on my POV and what I saw as a chance to get the story right, including making sure the article told the whole story about chiropractic, both positive and negative. Since then I have learned much more about policies and the wisdom of NPOV as a tool to write a real encyclopedia. The subject has been a hobby of mine for many years and I have studied it, participated and lurked on chiropractic discussion groups, and know lots about it. I know so much that I have even been encouraged by MDs, PhDs, and DCs, to write a textbook. I have written over 200 pages, but now I don't dare publish because of threats to myself and my family. Regarding editing, I don't think any of us can say we are to some degree totally free of our own POV when editing, but I try to subordinate my POV under NPOV, which largely involves not being deletionist towards opposing POV. I was thrilled when Dematt arrived here and showed a lightning learning curve regarding NPOV and collaboration. That's when the chiropractic article really took off in many ways. Before that it was a constant battleground and stalemates were the order of the day with little article development. POV warriors ruled and chiropractors held the article hostage by refusing to allow any criticism, even when well-referenced. I really enjoyed just sitting back and watching Dematt work. He didn't exhibit the defensiveness so common (understandably so!) to members of a profession that has always been held "outside", and to some degree tried to stay outside. He has been a model for many of us who have come to respect him as a Wikipedian, chiropractor, and person. I wish he would become an admin. -- <i><b><font color="004000">]</font></b></i> / <b><font color="990099" size="1">]</font></b> 17:48, 3 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::I would vote in a heartbeat for Dematt to be an administrator. This is a good hearted person who cares about people, he helped me a lot in the past too. Dematt, go for it, become an administrator, you are the kind of administrator I think is really needed! --]] 16:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
I have recently the list, adding a few errors, some of which should be easy to correct. | |||
I'm not sure I deserve all that, I'm no different than the rest of you. Anthon01, I have been watching the debate, so sorry for the slow response, but the answer to your question is not simple. As far as I am concerned, pseudoscience is a term used to motivate theorists to prove what they are saying. IOWs, scientists can't do all the work, they need the people who make the statement to do the leg work to prove that what they are saying is reasonable, because no-one wants to be labeled a pseudoscience and after all, if the one who comes up with the idea can't prove it, then who can. Now once a test has been developed and performed, the 'scientific community' will begin to evaluate the quality of the testing. This is what peer review is all about. Generally, as long as it adds to the knowledgebase, then we are all moving another step in the right direction. If it doesn't, the scientific community generally will ignore the information as well as the person that made the statement. My personal opinion is that the word pseudoscience should be used extremely sparingly, but thank goodness my opinion doesn't count at wikipedia. We are bound to V and RS and NPOV. | |||
Regards, ] (]) 05:58, 24 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
More later, I am hamstrung by time limits... ---- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 17:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
==File source problem with File:John J. Nugent, D.C..jpg== | |||
== The Chiropractic Theories: A Textbook of Scientific Research, By Robert A. Leach == | |||
] | |||
Thank you for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged. | |||
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created . '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''' per Misplaced Pages's ], ]. If the image is ] and ], '''the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:04, 7 December 2010 (UTC)''' per ] criterion ]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] (]) 17:04, 7 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
FYI | |||
== ] == | |||
* - By Robert A. Leach | |||
{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
-- <i><b><font color="004000">]</font></b></i> / <b><font color="990099" size="1">]</font></b> 06:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692013717 --> | |||
== WikiProject Chiropractic == | |||
I bought that one;-) Let's see where it takes us. ---- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 17:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
Hi! Thought you might be interested in ] which has just become active today. Would love for you to add your name to our list of members. ] (]) 00:13, 6 September 2017 (UTC) | |||
== ] of ] == | |||
] | |||
The file ] has been ] because of the following concern: | |||
== reliability of CZ articles == | |||
<blockquote>unused, low-res, no obvious use</blockquote> | |||
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ]. | |||
Your edit summary was: According to your edit summary, it seems like you fixed the reference but you deleted it. Deleting a reference becasue you think it is not formatted the way you like it is not a reason to completely delete the reference. The other references I added are formatted the same way but you did not delete them too. Please explain your edit or fix the reference. Though, I see nothing wrong with the reference. Take a look at closer look at the other formatted refs I added. I formatted the refs the same way. According to what Misplaced Pages policy you can delete a reference(s) becuase you think it was not formatted the way you like it. Your edit does not make any sense. ] ] 18:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
;formatted reference | |||
{{Reflist}} | |||
<ref name="Larry Sanger"> | |||
{{cite news | |||
|last=Citizendium community | |||
|first= | |||
|title=Chiropractic — Chiropractic approach to healthcare | |||
|url=http://en.citizendium.org/Chiropractic#Chiropractic_approach_to_healthcare | |||
|date= | |||
|work= | |||
|publisher=] | |||
|accessdate=2008-02-02 | |||
|quote=}}</ref> | |||
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} 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 --> | |||
Hi QuackGuru, sorry I didn't explain myself well. What I meant was; Larry Sanger did not write that, we did and it was imported to CZ where I kept it. I don't think giving Larry Sanger credit for all of Citizendium is the way to do it, but I don't know how to fix it. -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 02:23, 6 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
:Fixed. ] ] 02:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
:Is CZ articles reliable to use as references on Misplaced Pages? See ] policy. ] ] 03:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
<references/> | |||
::Hi QG, this is difficult for me to answer because I was partially responsible for editing the article on CZ. However, I can tell you that it was co-authored by two other reliable experts in their fields, neurophysiology and medicine. But, while one of my hopes is that CZ will be a verifiable and reliable source for wikipedia purposes, I think the community should use their collective judgement and make this decision carefully. I will abide by whatever decision is made. ---- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 06:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::This "approved article" has undergone a form of peer-review by credentialed topic experts. This confirms it is ]. Thanks. ] ] 07:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::Note: The reference template is used in part for first and last names. The ref name will be Citizendium community. ] ] 19:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::I changed it back per comment on a noticeboard. ] ] 05:11, 11 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
<span style="color:red;font-weight:bold;">This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the ] of each individual file for details.</span> Thanks, ] (]) 01:02, 8 May 2019 (UTC) | |||
== I have had respect for you but now == | |||
== ] of ] == | |||
] | |||
The file ] has been ] because of the following concern: | |||
The way you helped me during my time of worrying was special to me. I gained great respect for you during our conversations and all you help and advice. | |||
<blockquote>unused, low-res, no obvious use</blockquote> | |||
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ]. | |||
Well I just read the top of your user page of who you are and I have to say, my respect for you has grown. You are a beautiful person, keep up with those children you have. You are indeed a very special person in your own right. I just want to let you know that. I had only one child, did as many things humanly possible to help him become a wonderful adult, and I think I succeeded, I was a stay at home mom to raise him. | |||
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
He hasn't set up the appointment with the surgeon yet, though I keep reminding him that even though he sees a surgeon, not all surgeon carry a knife in their back pocket. (my surgeon for my first surgery tried everything he could think of before cutting into me.) You take care and remember that there are people who appreciate all that you try to do, me being one of them. Thanks again, --]] 13:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} 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 --> | |||
:Thanks Crohnie, that means more than you think - more than a Barnstar! :-) Thank you. I also got your email and will reply ASAP! -- <b><font color="999900">]</font></b> <font color="#009900" size="1">]</font> 04:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
<span style="color:red;font-weight:bold;">This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the ] of each individual file for details.</span> Thanks, ] (]) 01:01, 15 May 2019 (UTC) | |||
==AfD nomination of Chiropractic care: Research and Criticism== | |||
==MfD nomination of ]== | |||
]An article that you have been involved in editing, ], has been listed for ]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:adw --> -- <b><font color="996600" face="times new roman,times,serif">]</font></b> <sup><font color="#774400" size="1" style="padding:1px;border:1px #996600 dotted;background-color:#FFFF99">]</font></sup> 19:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
] ], a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may 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 --> ''']''' <small>(])</small> 13:23, 22 July 2020 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 16:29, 25 November 2021
|
4/20 - 9/21 2006 |
2 |
Invitation to CfD Category:Pseudoskeptic Target Discussion
I noticed that you have edited in related areas within WP, and so thought you might have an interest in this discussion.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 18:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Treatment techniques
The Talk:Chiropractic#Treatment techniques section needs an expert on the subject. I hope you are interested in helping out in reaching WP:GA status for chiropractic. This is possible with the help of an expert. QuackGuru (talk) 23:48, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Request
Hiya, at the pseudosciences list, I realize that it's a hot topic, but unless there's a strong consensus to do so on the talkpage, it's probably not a good idea to be removing sourced information like this. You may wish to modify the information, but the citations themselves should probably be left in place. Thanks, --Elonka 04:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Elonka, good to see you're still here. I respect what you are trying to do. Sorry to get involved, I'll leave it up to you. -- Dēmatt (chat) 04:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, was on vacation for awhile (Caribbean cruise, it was great!), and just got back last night. I'm still wading through my watchlist, and trying to sort out where I can best help. Do feel free to keep engaging at the pseudoscience list, I'm not trying to scare you off. :) All I'm asking is that you leave the citations in place, and perhaps try to modify the information from those citations. For example, perhaps create a new subsection on that page for certain entries, or rewrite them a bit? I'm not sure, I'm just trying to help avoid the "A reverts B, C reverts A, D reverts C, etc." edit wars. ;) Thanks for understanding, --Elonka 04:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- And you are doing a wonderful job as usual. I am sure that you will eventually get a good grip on it, but I'm afraid I don't have the kind of time it takes to deal with QuackGuru's loving little soul. If the bar for the inclusion criteria ever sinks so low as to include chiropractic, a profession that sees 10% of the US population in any one year, then it is too vague to clear the NPOV criteria for lists. If you raise that bar then it fails WP:PSCI, no matter what any quasi-reliable source says. Just doing my part.
- Did you do the Eastern cruise or the Western cruise? I've done both and loved each of them. I wanna go baaaackk!!! Though I was concerned about your situation last year, glad to see you fought through it.
- Thanks for your kindness. -- Dēmatt (chat) 04:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Nice to see two people whom I highly respect. Elonka, that might surprise you, chiroskeptic that I am, but Dematt is a man of integrity. Even when we disagree, and we do at times, we do it agreeably ;-) He has been the major factor in the expansion of the chiropractic article from a pitiful state to what it is today. A great Wikipedian!
- I am uneasy about the current dispute, since I'm somewhat split over the issue. The heading states that we can include the opinions of skeptics, but they are being kept out. The inclusion criteria are right in the heading, but PSCI is being applied. The problem is, we aren't placing it in the Category, just documenting that skeptics consider it to be pseudoscientific.
- OTOH, I also have qualms about including "chiropractic" as a whole, since it's a mixed bag. The parts of chiropractic that are generally considered pseudoscientific are three things:
- Vertebral subluxation (VS) and
- Innate Intelligence, with its Vitalism.
- VS is still the philosophical (no VS, no excuse for the existence of the profession) and legal foundation of the profession (no treatment of subluxation, no payment from Medicare!), and that is problematic for chiropractic and its reputation in the scientific and skeptical community, since it's a pseudoscientific construct without anatomical basis. Only chiropractors (mostly straights) believe in it. Many are openly against it, but it would be suicidal of the profession to openly reject it.
- Ideally we should include those three concepts, and state that the first two are elements of chiropractic, and include vitalism by itself, since it is an element of many forms of alternative medicine, not just chiropractic.
- I'm tired of the wikilawyering that panders to the fringe, instead of fighting for an NPOV version that will allow inclusion. Changing the article's title will solve that problem. People can choose one side or the other. Either they will exploit the current title to support keeping fringe ideas out, or they will support an NPOV title to allow inclusion. BTW, these elements of chiropractic that should be mentioned aren't "Questionable science", but clearly PS. They are in the first two of the four WP:PSCI criteria.
- One things is certain, no matter what we do, and no matter how well sourced, and even if DD Palmer himself appeared and admitted he had been one of the greatest quacks of all time, Levine2112 will appear and make sure that the word chiropractic is not allowed to stay on the page, even if he has to use socks and meatpuppets. There will never be peace there if the word is mentioned. The edit history has shown that to be the case. Only tight admin control and sanctions can prevent that. -- Fyslee (talk) 05:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Fyslee, thanks for the kudos. I know you are doing your best to be as neutral as you can and I do appreciate that, but you have to remember that pseudoscience is a pejorative and is a serious accusation. You can't create a list with 'the skeptical inquirer' as inclusion criteria as one of the accusers and expect it to ever be NPOV. That is why we require things like this type of inclusion criteria. So if you really want to work toward NPOV and credibility for wikipedia, work to correct the inclusion criteria and the rest will take care of itself.
- By the way, vitalism is not pseudoscience. All healers were vitalists until the early 20th century. Now when vitalists inject a spiritual being into the picture, it becomes religious, but that is not pseudoscience by definition. The new vitalists have migrated to emergence - and that is all materalistic and uses organization as an explanation for the development of intelligence when reductionist concepts can no longer answer the questions of life. One of our very own past wikipedians User:Gleng is one of those, and actually has finished research on the first model of how an emergent system might work showing how oxytocin will not result in lactation without suckling because the hypothalimus must receive the nerve stimulation from the alveoli before it will be primed to release the oxytocin. There is no way to have understood these processes in the days of DD Palmer, so yes they gave them spiritual elements. All people believed that. Innate intelligence has little scientific meaning today and I don't know any chiropractors that use the term (not saying there aren'a ny out ther), but can be thought of as a metaphor for those body functions that are controlled by the brain, which are most all as far as anyone knows. The degree that chiropractic has any affect on those functions is being studied. Is it going to show that 'chiropractic cures all ills' - No. And no-one says so. If you find any chiropractic organization that says so, let me know. Now are there chiropractors that think they can cure all ills - YES, and they drive us all crazy, but that does not mean that they are pseudoscientists, only crazy.
- Thanks for lending me your ear. -- Dēmatt (chat) 06:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, Dematt!!
Welcome back!!!! ... and thanks for the barnstar! ☺Coppertwig(talk) 01:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Welcome back to The Other Place (tm) :-). BTW, can you get the necessary people over at the Other-Other Place to edit their Vit C article to make it more readible. It's long winded gibberish at the moment, almost like it's been run through Bablefish or something :-(. Ta Shot info (talk) 11:04, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
ArbCom request for clarification: WP:PSEUDOSCIENCE
A request has been made for clarification of the ArbCom case WP:PSEUDOSCIENCE as it relates to List of pseudosciences and pseudoscientific concepts. I'm leaving this notification with all editors who have recently edited the article or participated in discussion. For now, the pending request, where you are free to comment, may be found here. regards, Backin72 (n.b.) 13:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
File:Chirocad 300dpi.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Chirocad 300dpi.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 22:45, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
NowCommons: File:Ddpalmer3.jpg
File:Ddpalmer3.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:DDPalmer.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Misplaced Pages, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Misplaced Pages, in this case: ]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:00, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Chiropractic.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Chiropractic.JPG. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanz 01:45, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
FICS
Thanks for fixing my reference :) I'm hoping to move the article over to mainspace soon, but the admin that deleted it last month says he still thinks it fails WP:Note, so I'm going to try to dig up a few more references if possible. Good to see you are back - I myself have taken several months off, and am not sure how much I'll be on here. DigitalC (talk) 03:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
- Also, I don't know how much I'm going to be around, would you mind watchlisting the FICS article? International Federation of Sports Chiropractic... thanks! DigitalC (talk) 04:14, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
invite
Hello, Dematt. You have new messages at Drsjpdc's talk page.You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Drsjpdc (talk)СДжП,ДС 22:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
File source problem with File:BJPalmer2.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:BJPalmer2.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Misplaced Pages's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
AfD - Chiropractic controversy and criticism
AfD nomination of Chiropractic controversy and criticism
An article that you have been involved in editing, Chiropractic controversy and criticism, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Chiropractic controversy and criticism. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. - I am notifying you because you participated in the original AfD. DigitalC (talk) 20:01, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Harvey Lillard
Hello :) I saw you're quite the expert on chiropractic and wanted to tell you that I'll be creating an article about Harvey Lillard these days. I'll write it here first- if you ever see something not right I'd be more than grateful if you could tell me about it. Regards! --Jargon 16:44, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Harvey Lillard.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Harvey Lillard.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Misplaced Pages's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Harvey Lillard.gif
Thank you for uploading File:Harvey Lillard.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Misplaced Pages's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Innate Drawing2.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Innate Drawing2.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Misplaced Pages's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:11, 13 September 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:11, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Citizendium approved errors
Hi Matt,
I have recently updated the list, adding a few errors, some of which should be easy to correct.
Regards, HaeB (talk) 05:58, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
File source problem with File:John J. Nugent, D.C..jpg
Thank you for uploading File:John J. Nugent, D.C..jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Misplaced Pages's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:04, 7 December 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:04, 7 December 2010 (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) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
WikiProject Chiropractic
Hi! Thought you might be interested in Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Chiropractic which has just become active today. Would love for you to add your name to our list of members. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 00:13, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of File:BJ Palmer.gif
The file File:BJ Palmer.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of File:Ddpalmer3.gif
The file File:Ddpalmer3.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
MfD nomination of User:Dematt/BCASingh
User:Dematt/BCASingh, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Dematt/BCASingh and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Dematt/BCASingh 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. Guy (help!) 13:23, 22 July 2020 (UTC)