User talk:Rohirok - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Askolnick (talk | contribs) at 11:26, 3 July 2006 (Looks can be deceiving (just like woo-woo spouting editors)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 11:26, 3 July 2006 by Askolnick (talk | contribs) (Looks can be deceiving (just like woo-woo spouting editors))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome to the Misplaced Pages

Here are some links I thought useful:

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. The Misplaced Pages:Village pump is also a good place to go for quick answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be Bold!

Sam 14:22, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Baptist

I've added a little reply on Talk:Baptist re: Baptists as Protestants. I agree it was wishy-washy the way it was stated, but the truth of the matter was lurking just below. The article text was ALMOST correct, just without making clear statements as to why. --ABQCat 05:28, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

||

Thanks for your work on the Telecaster article! It's really strong now. Auto movil 14:02, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

List of Agnostics

Hello. I received your message on the above. Because you can assure that you will maintain the list, I will change my vote to keep and rename. Jtmichcock 14:05, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the ArbCom Vote!

I wanted to thank my few "yes voters" in person...well, not in person, but at least contact you directly. Thank you for your vote, and for saying that you "liked me." It is appreciated. I love you.

Rowlan 15:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for voting!

Hello there! I wanted to thank you for taking the time to vote on my arbitration commitee nomination. Although it was not successful, I appreciate the time you spent to read my statement and questions and for then voting, either positively or negativly. Again, thank you! Páll 22:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Great work on Bigsby

I was going to come back to it, I'd just restored the link to tremolo while I investigated what disregarding rhythm to rapidly produce pitches when musical notation calls for such a treatment was supposed to mean. I'm still not entirely sure. But you've addressed my concerns I think, and more. Andrewa 18:14, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Wow... an American Baptist (minister?) from Cincinnati who plays a brass instrument? I'm starting to wonder if I know you.

Atchius 00:10, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Mediation Case: The Humanist papacy

Comments concerning this mediation case and the edit war leading up to it have been deleted. The matter is resolved.

About Ricardo Lagos in List of Agnostic

Absolutely it is confirmed ; Ricardo Lagos have been all his life AGNOSTIC. Everybody knows in Chile, he always has said it. Michelle Bachellet is agnostic too. I'am from Chile and I know what I write. Please it does not erase it!. (This unsigned comment was left by User:ANDRÉS NÚÑEZ)

Demkina RFM

Template:RFM-Filed

Note: I know you're not involved with the article anymore, but I thought you might possibly want to be involved in RFM. Or not. I just felt you should be notified as a possible party. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 18:33, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

If you're interested, I would appreciate your vote on the source dispute for the Natasha Demkina draft. Thanks! Dreadlocke 17:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for voting! I was hoping to use Pravda.RU as a very limited source per Misplaced Pages:Verifiability#Sources_of_dubious_reliability, for certain things I can't find anywhere else, but we know happened - for instance the trip to Japan. The limited use of Pravda.RU is for items detailed in User:Dreadlocke/Sourced_from_Pravda.RU. I hope you might reconsider your rejection! Thanks again! Dreadlocke 04:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Great idea on moving the lengthy source discussion to a debate section! I was thinking of doing the same thing. The voting section has gone way past what I intended and it's now just a big blobby mess... Dreadlocke 04:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

He says one of the world's sleaziest tabloids is credible enough

Because I believe everyone should be accountable for their words and actions, I am copying here some of the debate from the Talk:Natasha_Demkina page. Rohirok is backing the efforts of pro-paranormal editors to use one of the world's sleaziest tabloids as a source of information for the article on Natasha Demkina a Russian teenager who claims to diagnose people's illnesses with her X-ray-like vision. The young woman's "career" was launched with sensationalistic stories in Pravda RU -- Russia's equivalent of the Weekly World News on steroids and acid. Here for example are some of today's "science" news headlines:

"Humans to decipher the DNA of God and clone another Christ"

"Men with biggest reproductive organs all live in England"

"KGB ran secret laboratories to study extraterrestrial civilizations"

"US forces to attack heterosexual soldiers with homosexual bombs"

"Aliens probably build their bases on Earth’s seabed disturbing submarines"

"U.S. scientist says scores of UFOs fly around the Sun"

"Dragons came down to Earth from Sirius to share their wisdom with humans"

"Mankind descended from civilization of Atlanteans in the Arctic"

"Blind Russian mystic discerns colors by touch"

Other editors and I and are objecting to use of this sleazy tabloid as a Misplaced Pages source. Rohirok is arguing for its use along with three pro-paranormal editors:

"We have no reason to suppose that Pravda.RU is misrepresenting the claims that Demkina and her mother are making." Rohirok 03:12, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

No reason? Above are nine very good reasons not to believe anything printed in Pravda RU, which pays its writers by the lie, not by the word. Rohirok's thoughtless words are going to haunt him for a long time, I suspect.Askolnick 04:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up on the haunting! I've called up the intellectual poltergeist exterminators for help. Strangely, they have not found a trace of mind-ghosts in my vicinity, but they did find a trail leading in your general direction. Hmmmm... Well, have a nice day, and try to relax. Don't let yourself get too uptight with the Demkina article. Take a break if you want to. A long break. Rohirok 14:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to continue correcting you Rohirok, but the howling you hear is not coming from me or any ghosts. It's the howling of laughter from people who read your explanation why Pravda RU is a reputable source of information for the Natasha Demkina article. The especially hilarious part was your claim of being able to decide when a Pravda RU writer gets an actual fact into a story. Now for that sound of chains dragging? I'm not sure. But if it's coming from a couple of men in white suits, I'd suggest you go along quietly. Askolnick 22:20, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Askolnick is an award winning scientist eager to show you how easy it is to know the truth yourself. He also wrote an award winning article on Demkina for the Skeptical Inquirer and patiently explained the facts of her testing to all curious enough to want to know the details. Moreover, he is also a former magician and an expert in the way people fool themselves. He is widely regarded as a credible source in both the scientific and skeptic community. Rohirok appears to be a run-of-the-mill snake oil salesman with financial motivations to serve BS on a golden plate to the gullble. Pravda RU has no respect in the field of peer reviewed science--it is to truth what what the Weekly World News is to Journalistic integrity. Demkina is a scam artist who lets the gullible preach her charms so as to not feel guilty while profitting off ignorance while pretending to have x-ray vision. The only special power she has is no conscience.

If you want the truth--trust science, skeptics, and your basic logic skills (read up on logical fallacies). Truth isn't afraid of testing or available only to those claiming a divine gift. If you want to believe that some things are true even though they are not--then Pravda RU is for you. It may as well be called the University of Confirmation Bias and Poor Logic. Just because people want to trust and believe in "magic", doesn't make it right to disguise a lie in the cloak of truth! --Ungodly aka articulett @ the JREF Forum and soldier in the war against ignorance. Check out the facts for yourselves! Keep the "woo" out of you...

"Rohirok appears to be a run-of-the-mill snake oil salesman with financial motivations to serve BS on a golden plate to the gullble." Wow. This anonymous poster has no idea who he/she is talking about. I don't know whether to laugh or debunk this statement. Perhaps the hauntings that Skolnick warned me of are beginning. Entertaining stuff. Rohirok 10:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, she's not anonymous. She signed her identity. If you bothered checking, you'd see that she's a teacher in Las Vegas. And I think you're wrong. She does have a good idea what she's talking about (except the part about me being a scientist; I'm not. I'm a science/medical journalist, with many articles published in peer-reviewed science publications.) She said "appear" not is, and you DO appear to be as she described. Looks may be deceiving, but in this case, only you and your hairdresser know for sure. If she got it wrong, you only have yourself to blame for claiming to know when a Pravda RU writer gets a fact into a story. That claim screams of snake-oil salesmanship. Rohirok, I was right. Your words have begun to haunt you. You're now hearing the howls of laughter coming from the JREF forum. Askolnick 11:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)