User talk:Middle 8: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 09:30, 29 January 2015 editMiddle 8 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users8,254 edits busy tag← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 11:10, 31 December 2024 edit undoMiddle 8 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users8,254 edits add cmt talk pages (conversations in one place)Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
(147 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{NOINDEX\|visible = no}}		{{NOINDEX\|visible = no}}
			* <big>'''Welcome to my usertalk page!'''</big> Please ] and see  ] on my userpage.
	{{Busy}}<br>
			* <big>'''If you leave a message here, I will reply here'''</big> unless you state a different preference or ping me. Likewise, if I comment on your page, I'd just as soon keep the thread there, if you're OK with that. It's much easier for me to keep conversations in one place.

			* '''Privacy note: Do not post any personal information about me on Misplaced Pages''' beyond what I disclose on this and my other user pages. See ''']''' and ], which is taken as seriously as ], as it should be.
	{{Tutnum}}

			That said... let's get high! On the ol' hierarchy...
	{{Boxboxtop\|}}
			<br>
	{{Template:User Scientist}}
	{{Template:User acupuncturist}}
	{{User:Ashley Y/Userbox/Humanist}}
	{{Template:User Autistic rights}}
	{{User:Fluence/(006) User Misplaced Pages\|2006}}
	{{Veteran Editor Userbox}}
	{{User:Middle_8/Userbox/singular-they}}
	{{Boxboxbottom}}
	<hr>
	'''If you leave a message here, I will reply here''' unless you state a different preference. It's much easier for me to keep conversations in one place.
	<hr>
	'''Privacy note: Do not post any personal information about me on Misplaced Pages''' beyond what I disclose on this and my other user pages. See ''']''' and ], which is taken as seriously as ], as it should be.
	<hr> Please see my ] for ] and related Chinese medical topics
	<hr>
	<span style="font-size:0.9em">For my approximate (on the lower side) total edit count on Misplaced Pages, add 5,432 edits to my </span>
	<hr>
	<u>Maxims <span style="font-size:0.8em">(in lieu of more userboxes)</span>:</u><br>
	The ] applies on the internet<br>
	Judge editors ]<br>
	Edits should have useful ]<br>
	A healthy dose of ] can help almost everywhere, but not with ] or ]<br>
	{{Break\|2}}<hr>

			]

	<hr>
	{{cot\|title=userpage boilerplate for mirror sites}}		{{cot\|title=userpage boilerplate for mirror sites}}
	{{userpage}}		{{userpage}}
	{{cob}}		{{cob}}
			'''<big>]''' (personal list)</big><br>
	{{Break\|1}}
	''']''' ''(as yet incomplete; check the history)''		''']''' ''(as yet incomplete; check the history)''
			</center>
	<br>''']''' (personal list)
	{{Break\|2}}
	__TOC__		__TOC__

			== ArbCom 2019 election voter message ==
	== Acupuncture and Biomedical Correlate ==
	:Review request for a review on the acupuncture page, first paragraph. See the Talk page, "Physical correlates of acupoints" section and "Physical correlates of acupoints, Part Two." I am concerned that an ethnocentric bias on the part of editors has prevented a simple edit. The editors stand by some very shaky references and will not accept references from the most prestigious universities in the world, including those in China. At issue, the current article reads inaccurately, "Scientific investigation has not found any histological or physiological correlates for traditional Chinese concepts such as qi, meridians and acupuncture points," and yet I have sourced numerous peer reviewed studies from reputable sources showing MRI brain activity, hemodynamic and oxygen pressure correlates. Please review, I think you will find the research interesting. ] (]) 13:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
	::Thanks for the note; I've been very busy and only read it just now. I will have a look, but can't get into anything very intense for another week or so. But I will have a close look. This is an important area and we need to get it right. --] (]) 16:46, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
	:::Note to self and {{U\|Acuhealth}} aka TriumvirateProtean: believe it or not, I haven't forgotten about this, which is why I didn't archive it. Besides being occupied elsewhere, I've been waiting for good sources: not just studies, but reviews (per MEDRS). Looks like ] now. --] <small>(] • ] • ])</small> 20:09, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

			<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
	== YEAH SCIENCE!! ==
			<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 on {{#time:l, j F Y\|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data\|2019\|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

			The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
	{\| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
	\|rowspan="2" valign="top" \| {{#ifeq:\|alt\|]\|]}}

			If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx\|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. ] (]) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
	\|rowspan="2" \|
			</td></tr>
	\|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" \| '''The E=mc² Barnstar'''
			</table>
	\|-
			<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2019/Coordination/MMS/04&oldid=926750357 -->
	\|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" \| YO BITCHES, this barnstar is awarded to Middle 8, for making poison out of rice and beans, saving our lives in the desert by building a battery out of spare change, and because I went through nearly every edit over the past year on Acupuncture and saw Middle8's profound mastery of scientific understanding. Some of his excellent edits may have been reverted, but they haven't gone unnoticed. Thanks for your excellent contributions! ] (]) 06:09, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
			==Concern regarding ]==
	\|}
			] Hello, Middle 8. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that ], a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months ], so if you wish to retain the page, please ] again or ] that it be moved to your userspace.
	<br>

	:{{reply-to\|LesVegas}} '''WOW!''' Thanks man, that made my day! Truly appreciated... ''''' !!!''''' ... cheers! --] <small>(] • ])</small> 07:08, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
			If the page has already been deleted, you can ] so you can continue working on it.

			Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 14:02, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
			: --] <small>(])] • ]</small> 18:36, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
			==Your draft article, ]==
			]

			Hello, Middle 8. It has been over six months since you last edited the ] submission or ] page you started, "]".

			In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia ], the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can ]. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

			Thanks for your submission to Misplaced Pages, and happy editing. <!-- Template:Db-draft-deleted --><!-- Template:Db-csd-deleted-custom --> <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 04:33, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
			:Fine by me, ]. FWIW, although I created the article, it was not as a draft (I think it might've been a redirect ]). It was significantly changed by other editors, thereby bringing about the current situation. They're the ones who would benefit from the above message, FWIW -- it does no good here (but no harm either, of course; no worries). Kudos for helping maintain WP, and happy editing! --] <small>(])] • ]</small> 08:36, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

			== ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message ==

			<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
			<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y\|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data\|2021\|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

			The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

			If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx\|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)</small>
			</td></tr>
			</table>
			<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2021/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1056563210 -->

			== Hi. ==

			--] (]) 23:00, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

			== ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message ==

			<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
			<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px;">]</div>
			<div class="ivmbox-text">
			Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y\|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data\|2022\|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

			The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

			If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx\|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)</small>

			</div>
			</div>
			<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2022/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1124425182 -->

			== ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message ==

			<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
	== AE request closed ==
			<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">]</div>
			<div class="ivmbox-text">
			Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y\|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data\|2023\|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

			The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
	The result of , which you filed against JzG, is that both parties are to be warned. Accordingly, you are hereby warned not to file frivolous or vexatious AE requests or to use Misplaced Pages's conduct enforcement mechanisms in an attempt to remove an opponent with whom you are engaged in a content dispute. You are also warned to respect Misplaced Pages policies on neutrality, consensus, and verifiability as well as all other applicable policies. Should you fail to adhere to this warning, there is a high probability that you will face substantive sanctions in the future. This warning will be logged as a discretionary sanction at the appropriate page, as will the warning to JzG. ] \| ] 01:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
	:{{TPS}} I'd like to see far more serious sanctions against those such as you who disrupt the project. -] (]) 12:08, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
	:::Well, Roxy, I'm sure that's mutual, and unless you have something really constructive (or at least interesting or amusing) to say on this page, please don't bother doing so again. --] <small>(] • ])</small> 15:56, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
	::Given that JzG was warned, it's not clear in what sense this was a frivolous request. The warning suggests that there was indeed a behavioral problem. ] (]) 12:25, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
	:::{{U\|TimidGuy}}, what they warned him for had nothing to do with why I filed the complaint. It turned into a "gotcha" fest, as these things do (I'd forgotten...). I thought AE would be better than that, but it still tends toward the same old B.S. -- a zero-tolerance witch-hunt -- find whatever looks bad, cherry-pick it, and depict it as a "pattern". At least the warning they gave me was justified; I should've inquired about whether such a posting was appropriate, but I was annoyed when I posted it, and had forgotten Bill Murray's advice to the groundhog ("don't drive angry"). ... OTOH, I suppose Guy deserved, in the bigger scheme of things, to get dinged for incivility, because he does do it too much, and unlike me, some people are truly bothered by it. (Gee, maybe that's part of why civility is one of ], ya think?) It can set a bad example and seems like bullying.
	:::The thing that does bother me is the IDHT in the face of MEDRS's that disprove skeptics' assumptions about scientific opinion. It sometimes seem like they can't ''imagine'' that the consensus in the skeptical blogosphere could ''possibly'' be different from the consensus in the scientific community. It doesn't compute. They think the burden is on other editors to prove there isn't a consensus that, say, acupuncture is as discredited as homeopathy. It's pervasive, and nowhere more apparent in Kww's Arbcom filing, where an imaginary "consensus" is simply asserted. Same thing in Kww's and others' initial comments at Talk:Acupuncture ''']'''.... but to Kww's credit, he seemed to back off his more extreme comments (which were that we should exclude any reviews with positive findings, including Cochrane-level reviews). --] <small>(] • ])</small> 15:56, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

			If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx\|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:36, 28 November 2023 (UTC)</small>
	::::fwiw, I think Roxy's post was infelicitous piling on. But I also think, Middle 8, that the AE posting was poor judgement. Not sure what drove you to do that but there was no chance that was going to fly, and that, along with the ill-formed RfC/U on QuackGuru, are establishing a pattern that is going to stick to you; you have pooped in your own back yard twice now. I'm sorry to see that. ] (]) 16:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
	::::: {{replyto\|Jytdog}} It ''was'' bad judgement... like Bill Murray said. And I apologized to Guy (but your comment is still accurate, unfortunately -- part of it's my fault, but there are also double standards on Misplaced Pages). Re consensus, see my ''']''' (which is a response mainly to his comment), or read the last few posts between me and Kww at the bottom of talk:Acu to get an idea what I'm talking about. Briefly: If what you're saying is consensus ''extended to all conditions'', that would be reflected in reviews. But there's real disagreement over whether or not it works for pain and nausea -- and I recognize that that pool of possibility may also dry up, but that's where we are now. In a few years maybe the literature will be like homeopathy, but as long as there are invited pro-and con editorials, and an IPD meta-analysis, there is obviously mainstream debate -- see etc., which reflect that. --] <small>(] • ])</small> 22:14, 11 January 2015 (UTC) <small>edited 23:26, 11 January 2015 (UTC)</small>

			</div>
	::::Actually, what I said in the first place was that we shouldn't include a laundry-list of individual reviews, because there's always a pressure from people to include the ones that are slightly positive and that distorts the perspective of the article. Similarly, we shouldn't list the few that find acupuncture is harmful, because those are also clearly false negatives. Include the scientific consensus, which ''is'' that acupuncture has no substantial effect beyond the placebo effect, and leave it at that. There's no doubt in my mind that there is a scientific consensus that acupuncture is a placebo, and you have even agreed with that stance: "''''". So why do you argue that there is not a scientific consensus? Why doesn't a phrasing like "the benefits of acupuncture are non-existent or trivial" sum it up adequately?—](]) 16:18, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
			</div>
			<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2023/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1187132125 -->

			== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
	{{od}} fwiw, {{u\|Kww}}, in my view this is messier than most people will actually acknowledge and deal with. One reason I appreciate Middle 8's perspective on Acu is that he actually deals with that. There are a set of difficult, hard facts here that there is no room in the acu article for, due to POV-pushing ''on both sides'', namely:
	* acu is indeed based on pre-scientific principles. If anybody claims today that "qi" and "merdians" have any reality, they are doing pseudoscience
	* conventional medicine fails to help people sometimes, especially with regard to pain, which we still do not understand very well on basic scientific levels and even today we lack drugs and devices that effectively help some people who are in pain
	* clinical studies have shown benefit of acu in some populations of people who are still in pain when doctors have done their best with conventional medicine. the placebo issues '''don't matter''', clinically. the risk is tiny and compared to actually doing nothing extra, some people who are otherwise in pain are helped by this extra procedure. '''that''' is what matters.
	* the use of acu as a complementary medicine in the situations mentioned above is discussed in medical textbooks (it doesn't get more mainstream than that) and is widely practiced. some of that is driven by market demand but medical centers wouldn't offer it if there wasn't some rationale (the clinical evidence) for it
	I believe that Middle 8 gets all that, which is rare around here. A reasonable article about acu would be anchored on those facts and I think if Middle 8 had the article to himself, it would look that way. But you get acu-proponents constantly making insane claims about acu and the quack-fighters pushing back way too hard. The article is a wasteland, and there is no way to make the extremes step away. So I stepped away. That's my view, again, fwiw. (and none of this excuses Middle 8's poor judgement in bringing the AE) ] (]) 16:36, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
	:I agree that the social issue of whether a placebo is worth paying for confounds the issue, but it doesn't confound it much in my eye. If someone with chronic hives is helped by a sugar pill, I'm not about to endorse putting any statements that say that sugar is effective for the treatment of hives into ]. Similarly, if the placebo effects of acupuncture help someone with chronic nausea, that doesn't make me inclined to put any statements into the article that says it helps with nausea.—](]) 16:49, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
	::I hear what you are saying. Part of why I emphasized that the placebo issues don't matter is that I was talking to you, and you are pretty solidly in the quack-fighter camp, and the placebo thing is what you reflexively reach for when talking about indications where acu has shown benefit over doing nothing extra. (btw I have the greatest respect for the work quack-fighters do, and I do a lot of that myself). In my view the quack-fighter camp way, way overplays the placebo thing - the data about placebo in indications where acu has shown benefit over doing nothing extra are messier than you all acknowledge. But anyway, thanks for reading what I wrote. Good luck! ] (]) 17:02, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

			<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
	{{replyto\|Kww}} - re your above comment beginning with "Actually, what I said...": time out, I call IDHT. You didn't quote the second part of what I said that differentiates our positions: "''''". To answer your question, why not say instead that some scientists conclude (''insert your quote''), and that others agree with the possible exception of pain and nausea? That's how the NHS did it: see the evidence page, (scroll down to "Positive evidence", penultimate paragraph). Also note that in the archived page, it says the found acu to be effective for lower back pain only, while they add tension headache and migraine. It ''may'' be that acu really is a mild analgesic above placebo: I tend to suspect not, to be honest, but the evidence is consistent with that. When groups like the NICE say so, we have to reflect that. Don't we? --] <small>(] • ])</small> 22:38, 11 January 2015 (UTC) <small>23:40, 11 January 2015 (UTC)</small>
			<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
	::The people that you've quoted as believing that acupuncture's effects are clinically relevant are ''including'' the placebo effect. Whether recommending a placebo is ethical is a question for another day. Who is arguing that there is a substantial effect above and beyond the placebo effect?—](]) 00:35, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
			<div class="ivmbox-text">
	:::I'm not at all sure of your premise; how do you know this? Pretty sure the NHS is going off Cochrane reviews and the like, and they all use sham as a control. --] <small>(] • ])</small> 00:42, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
			Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y\|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data\|2024\|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
	::::Vickers is pretty clear about it: I'm not aware of any reliable review that indicates a substantial delta between sham and actual, while there are certainly studies that show substantial deltas between doing nothing and performing acupuncture. That's why it's quite possible to have people concerned with financial value recommend its use while people that are concerned primarily with whether it has any actual physical effect say that it has little to none.—](]) 01:01, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
	:::::{{u\|Kww}} just popping in here to comment on the above, where you seem to think there are two kinds of people in the world (the battleground mentality us/them) - those who love money (?) and those who love evidence. The group I tried to point out above is completely left out; namely those who want reasonable options for people still in pain after conventional medicine has done all it can. And what I hear from you is a big whopping "who cares". Maybe you think that is unfair, but I don't see you thinking like a doctor who has patients that need help. Can you please, pretty please, think orthogonally to the battle for just a bit, and see that it ''matters'' that acu does something for those patients, compared to doing nothing extra? ] (]) 00:39, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
	::::::It doesn't matter to how an encyclopedia describes it, ]. We don't plant information into articles about placebos so that it is easier to deceive people receiving placebo treatment into thinking that they will be helped. That path would lead to an incredibly strange article on ], for example, describing all the maladies that sugar pills are effective for.—](]) 01:19, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
	:::::::mmmm no. first of all it is not mainstream medical ''practice'' to give people sugar pills. as i noted above, acu has become mainstream as complementary (not alternative) medicine in some pain indications. But the deeper thing in what you write, really goes to what the editors working on any given article decide the scope will be, and specifically with regard to MEDRS, whether they choose to emphasize consensus practice or EBM, which are ''sometimes'' quite different. (i am not saying that they are different for these pain indications, btw) You can see how the difference between EBM and consensus practice, played out on the tamiflu article for example. It was insanely weighted toward a Cochrane review (where the lead Cochrane person is a notorious crank) -- see and after I and some others pushed back it looked like it does now, which is ], with more weight on what is mainstream medical ''practice''. (there is an RfC on it ] and you can see where the consensus is going) As it stands now the acu article is (in my view) the ugly result of a battle, that gives no information on how acu is actually used. The clinical perspective is entirely absent and it is not very useful for anybody as an encyclopedia article. If the editors involved could agree to end the battle and just focus the scope on mainstream medical practice, the article would look very different. But that would require the pro-acu "lunatic charlatans" to back way the hell off things like using acu to actually treat cancer (oy), and would require the quack-fighters to put away their EBM swords. I don't see the pro-acu gang doing that anytime soon (they are if anything pushing harder lately) so I completely understand that the quack-fighters cannot walk away from an EBM focus which is their best weapon. So the article will remain as it is for the forseeable future. But focusing it on what is mainstream medical practice would probably be as useful a weapon... as it is, there is enough quackademic medicine via clinical trialling to give the pro-acu people some ground on which to fight; focusing on what is actual mainstream ''practice'' would take that ground away altogether. Anyway, good luck to you! ] (]) 01:36, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

			The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
	Oh man, I didn't notice this AE request at all. I haven't ever had dealings with Guy, so I probably wouldn't have had much pertinent to offer anyway. But I have seen editors claim something is "X, Y or Z" and when you point out reliable sources that say it's actually "A, B or C" they ignore it and not only repeat their original claims but edit accordingly. That can be a problem on the encyclopedia, and it would be nice to get a ruling on IDHT conduct like that. Do you think Arbcom handle something like that? ] (]) 00:32, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

			If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx\|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
	== Thank you ==

			</div>
	That was a nice thing you did, and I do appreciate it. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 22:46, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
			</div>
			<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1258243506 -->

Latest revision as of 11:10, 31 December 2024

Welcome to my usertalk page! Please AGF and see § Collaboration & accomodation on my userpage.
If you leave a message here, I will reply here unless you state a different preference or ping me. Likewise, if I comment on your page, I'd just as soon keep the thread there, if you're OK with that. It's much easier for me to keep conversations in one place.

Privacy note: Do not post any personal information about me on Misplaced Pages beyond what I disclose on this and my other user pages. See User:Middle 8/Privacy and WP:OUTING, which is taken as seriously as WP:BLP, as it should be.

That said... let's get high! On the ol' hierarchy...

userpage boilerplate for mirror sites

This is a Misplaced Pages user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Misplaced Pages, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Misplaced Pages. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Middle_8.

Editing tips (personal list)
Archives (as yet incomplete; check the history)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:List of Better Call Saul characters

Hello, Middle 8. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of Better Call Saul characters, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages. FireflyBot (talk) 14:02, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

noted --Middle 8 (s)talk • privacy 18:36, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:List of Better Call Saul characters

Hello, Middle 8. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of Better Call Saul characters".

In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Misplaced Pages, and happy editing. Liz 04:33, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Fine by me, Liz. FWIW, although I created the article, it was not as a draft (I think it might've been a redirect here). It was significantly changed by other editors, thereby bringing about the current situation. They're the ones who would benefit from the above message, FWIW -- it does no good here (but no harm either, of course; no worries). Kudos for helping maintain WP, and happy editing! --Middle 8 (s)talk • privacy 08:36, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi.

My answer. --The Explaner (talk) 23:00, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)