User talk:Dreadstar/UTDEHA1

Wednesday 7 August 21:34 UTC Welcome to my talk page!

Archives and sandboxes

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Dreadlocke's Sandboxes

I don't archive everything, some things I delete after responding to them; and I don't archive in any specific chronological order.

The Original Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for your many excellent contributions to paranormal articles. - Solar 13:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks much, Dreadlocke, for checking in on the TM article and for pointing me to the Guideline on Criticism.TimidGuy 22:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I need to archive the TM Talk page. We sure have filled it with verbiage. I do appreciate your appearing on the Talk page and noting Sethie's personal attack.TimidGuy 02:22, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the endorsement on my Talk page in response to Sethie's challenges on COI. I really appreciate your feedback. I may be posting an RfC today related to my dispute with Sethie on his disallowing a rebuttal in the cult section.TimidGuy 12:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: EVP

Yeah, strong feelings are the spice of life.. but it can sometimes get in the way of common sense. ---J.S ^(T/C) 05:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

You're a hero

Thanks, Dreadlocke. Lately I'd been thinking I needed to find a forum to answer questions about verifiability, etc. Sethie seems to be making up rules sometimes. I really appreciate your feedback on the topic and for pointing me to those forums.TimidGuy 22:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Really appreciate your help, Dreadlocke. I've now added an official warning tag to Sethie's Talk page.TimidGuy 12:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the e-mail. And for the action you took. Great to have your perspective. And note the conciliatory message on my Talk page.TimidGuy 20:25, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Natasha Demkina

I really hate it when there are editors who make it their personal mission to push an agenda on certain entries, it ruins the entire community approach, doesn't it. I'll have a look at your draft, but I haven't read up on the topic much so I think that the most that I can do is to go over the wording.

On a personal level, it always rings alarm bells with me when anybody calls any paranormal ability a gift. I guess that it is a cultural thing. There are a lot of implications to that word. The biggest being that a gift must be given, and in order for something to be given there must be a giver.

perfectblue 07:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

So that you know in advance, I'm a total skeptic about this case (sorry, but I can't rationalize it with my beliefs on scientific, magical or religious healing), but I will accept that any verifiable claim that was made about her and her abilities can and should be documented (I firmly believe that it is important to document what people believe or what they say happens, even if it is/appears to be wrong).

perfectblue 17:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm working on my own draft in my sandbox, its going to use most of the same information that you have, but broken down slightly differently, and without a few details that I think are irrelevant (I'm treating it as an entry on her abilities and claims rather than an entry on her). It should be shorter and a little more acceptable to skeptics, but without having alleged and so-called every other sentence, and having the core of the paranormal belief in it. I'll do some more work on it and you can see what you think.

perfectblue 08:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

To answer your comment on my talk: Yes, actually, it does appear to be :) Now it's just hit-and-runs instead of concentrated insurgency. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 20:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Totally-Disputed Template

Hi - thanks for telling me that - I've restored the !votes and changed the result to keep. I just wonder why the person who removed the anon !vote didn't restore the others (even though we're not supposed to remove anon messages). Anyway, thanks :) Martinp23 10:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

If only.

I came across the essay WP:TIGERS today and I wish I had done so a long, long time ago. I'm sure you can see why. :) Cheers, - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 21:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Demkina and the Center

Well, the opening paragraph is her biography, who she is, why she was famous, and what she is doing now. If it doesn't belong there somebody will need to add a "Where is she now" section on at the end which would be a lot more messy.

It's valid information, it means that even though she was not able to prove her abilities to science, she has entered a known institute to continue research of some nature. Taking it out would make it look like she just gave up and went home.

perfectblue 08:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Award

Thanks very much Dreadlocke, That's a great start to the new year, it's always nice to get an award. Thanks again. - Solar 10:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I accept your offer of help!

Thanks so much, Dreadlock. Yes, it would be really great to have your help. My advocate seemed to give me some good advice early on, but mostly he's been somewhat uncommunicative. Plus, it's been kind of an odd situation to have Sethie's advocate appear in my discussion with my advocate. And my advocate acknowledged he has no experience with Medcom. It will be great to have advice from an experienced editor like yourself.

Where should we communicate?TimidGuy 16:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Request for mediation for John Edward

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to Example. As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. The process of mediation is voluntary and focuses exclusively on the content issues over which there is disagreement. Please review the request page and the guide to formal mediation, and then indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you, [signature]

— Elembis 18:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Guideline on Paranormal

Hello Dreadlocke, I thought you might be interested in an attempt I have made to come to some kind of consensus on James Randi's inclusion in every paranormal article. I think this would be a first step towards a wider guideline on paranormal issues. Let me know what you think. - Solar 19:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Wizard (fantasy)

I put in the request for a move. Goldfritha 03:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/John Edward. For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 00:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for the notice, I will be away for the weekend and probably will not be able to participate until next Tuesday, Jan 23. Dreadlocke ☥ 00:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

No worries

The mediation hasn't actually begun yet, that was just an indication that the MedCom will take on the case. I'll leave a note on the page saying that you'd rather not begin just yet, and that way no Mediator will take the case yet. How's that sound? ^demon^{[omg plz]} 02:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

The RfC on Cult

Hi Dreadlocke, if you have the time your participation in the RfC at Cult would be most appreciated. Thanks. Tanaats 19:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

rap disambizzle

I've always thought of "rap" and "hip hop" as related but slightly different genres, with rap having more emphasis on the lyrical content and delivery, and hip hop more geared toward the rhythm and beat and whatnot. But I get the feeling my view is neither qualified nor mainstream, so I pretty much shut up about it. That much having been said, I don't really remember what I did last summer, so I'm not sure how it is affected by the change of redirects. I will say this much though: It is generally a bad idea to "fix" redirects that aren't broken, especially if they may need to be "re-fixed" at a later date. It's generally a good idea to take the most conservative possible approach in interpreting what the writer intended to link to. If a link in an article points to something besides a disambiguation page, and to a target that isn't an obvious error, I've learned it's probably best to just leave it alone... simply because semantics can change, articles can be split, redirects can be replaced with more specific articles, etc. This probably doesn't answer your question, but I'm not really sure what you were asking. Let me know if you'd like more advice, or if I've said too much. —freak(talk) 21:45, Feb. 4, 2007 (UTC)

Link

Talk:Criticism_and_response_in_parapsychology

That article you linked me to is great, now that I had the time to read it. I hope we can find some better polls that say more about how scientists in general, when polled anonymously view psi. I suspect the one cited on the NAS in the ESP article was not private, but who knows. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 05:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Oddball barnstar!

		The Oddball Barnstar
		For creating the Superpup article! 64.62.8.242 06:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I see you were the editor who created the article - fantastic, yet odd find! Funny! 64.62.8.242 06:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Dreadlocke

... Is a superpup!!! Cool, dude. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 07:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

I've never been through this process. What is your take? Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Criticism_and_response_in_parapsychology Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 01:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I've been advised to create a sandbox for the Criticism and response in parapsychology article. It's here, renamed to Controversy in parapsychology. I'm not sure if people want to edit under my user page, or edit the main article. But, if it's decided to edit the sandbox, It would be great to have your input. I won't be editing in the beginning, while I see what format people want to use etc. I'm putting this on several talk pages. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 05:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Psychic

Talk:Psychic#Focus Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 06:33, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

EVP

Yes, Tom Butler, who is just back from being banned for COI, tried to get it deleted. I agreed with him, simply because it seems that the article can't present just the facts (for instance, see my recent edits), and skeptics keep weaseling it. It's the most controversial page I've seen, though I'm guessing John Edward was as much or more. I just don't think it's ever going to be fair, in spite WP:FRINGE. At the same time, it's rather a good page. I didn't get to vote on deletion, but it wouldn't have mattered. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 01:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Medium/Channeller

Seen this? [1] Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 01:43, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Awwwww, Dreadlocke, you're so cool. Thank you! (: (: Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 23:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Well

I would consider that an honest appraisal of your feelings on Randi, not a personal attack per se. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 06:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

If you feel like they are too strong, you can always edit the comments and tone it down a bit. Or if you think that it's just not worth it, retract them. It's up to you, really and how you think others will view your comments. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 06:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem. :) --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 06:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Friendly suggestion

I have to go back through my contributions to make sure they have not been reverted by AS openly or by a sockpuppet because of his wikistalking. Notice I edit pages first, he then reverts me. This user should have been blocked a long time ago. KazakhPol 03:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Right now I am just trying to avoid him. The more I edit pages he perceives as his own, the angrier he seems to get. I do not mind ignoring certain pages. There are other pages I can edit. I will keep in mind the point about civility. KazakhPol 04:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Kazuba

Kazuba is usually nice. I left him a note on his attack also, maybe I shouldn't since it was yours to respond, but I did. Look at the top of my talk page and see if you see anything different (: User_talk:Martinphi

Yes, I've never been able to get him to really help out, he said his wife (see email) vetoed it. But if you could, he knows the subjects back and forth. Glad you like the pentagram. I faked the paranormal template with CSS code (couldn't tell the difference, could you!). I know there was probably a better and much easier way, but that is a Wiki -code secret hidden from mine eyes. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 05:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I responded again to Kazuba User_talk:Kazuba#Dreadlocke Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 20:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

EVP

Opinions needed from more editors: Talk:Electronic_voice_phenomenon#EVP_primarily_as_a_cultural_phenomenon.2C_rather_than_a_scientific_debate Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 22:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

"I don't think either the popular culture or scientific views should be sacrificed for each other" Yes, that is what I'm trying to say there, and we have another who agrees, so this is working toward consensus... or at least a power block. You're sure right, it's a terrible page for controversy. I'd just as soon delete it. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 23:53, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

whatever

You know, I think he means well and is trying to be nice. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 02:01, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've sent my mind to Jupiter, so I must have missed that part. Maybe it was the baseball bat strike to my head that I suffered in New York..er, Detroit - RC!... Dreadlocke ☥ 02:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Just that tiny part. Nothing else

User:Kazuba 14 Feb 2007

<sigh> Ok, I accept. Thank you. Dreadlocke ☥ 03:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Very strange, but he's beginning to grow on me

Yeah. I like him. And he is a bit weird. Read his user page. He is actually a great writer, or would be with just a bit of training, but he says he is no good. His is one of the only user pages I know worth reading. OK, I'm really going now. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 03:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice

Thank-you very much for your kind and friendly advice, sorry for being a bit sensitive, you are probably the nicest person to correct me on wikipedia to date. Aaliyah Stevens 10:37, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Request for mediation "John Edward"

The request for mediation page says that you contacted the mediator and said you were "feeling under the weather"? That was 3 weeks ago. You seem to be contributing pretty often now. When will you continue with the mediation?Wikidudeman ^(talk) 10:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)