User talk:Orangemarlin

* Click here to leave me a new message

I like to keep both sides of my discussions together, so if you leave me a message here, I will reply here. If I left a question on your talk page, please reply there; I'm watching your page so I will get back to you as soon as possible. Thanks!

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update

No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

FACs needing feedback view •
MLS Cup 2022	Review it now
Fountain Fire	Review it now
1973 FA Charity Shield	Review it now

Featured article removal candidates
Andrée's Arctic balloon expedition	Review now
Helium	Review now
Martin Keamy	Review now
Pauline Fowler	Review now
Battle of Red Cliffs	Review now
Mariah Carey	Review now
Pokémon Channel	Review now
Concerto delle donne	Review now
The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask	Review now
Geography of Ireland	Review now

Watching Anti-Science POV admin candidates

• None for now.

Articles on Quackademic Medicine

Below are articles articles, mostly medical but some in the sciences, that promote ideas or POV's that might endanger human life. Feel free to add your own, but I'm watching and cleaning up these articles. Please sign if you add something.

• List of medicinal herbs-lacks any references, and implies these drugs can help.Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Herbalism-same as above Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Homeopathy-ridiculous Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Attachment therapy-don't let your children go there Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC) This has been rewritten since User:AWeidman (Dr Becker-Weidman) and his 6 socks were indef banned. Fainites ^barley 16:45, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
• Medicinal plants of the American West-more unsourced POV edits Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Alternative medicine-more of the same Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Naturopathic medicine-Actually not completely off the wall, but some parts are bad. Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Er, Duesberg hypothesis and poppers could both use more work, and talk about endangering lives... especially the former. MastCell ^Talk 18:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
• I'd also add ephedra to the list... I did a lot of work cleaning it up and it's not so bad anymore (it actually references the serious harms and deaths associated with ephedra supplements in a way that goes beyond referring to the FDA as jackbooted thugs, now). But much of the same material is duplicated in ECA stack, which I haven't been as successful with, and which I fear gives an erroneous impression as to the safety record of ephedra-containing dietary supplements. MastCell ^Talk 19:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
• Arguably, Reflexology, though that's probably not actually dangerous, just ridiculously oversold. Adam Cuerden ^talk 00:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
• Vaccine controversy. Anti-vaxers are really dangerous. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
• Hulda Clark. A dangerous scam. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
• Gary Null. Advocates nonsense. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
• Joseph Mercola. Advocates nonsense and repeated run ins with the FTC. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
• rebirthing, reparenting, Power therapies. Primal Scream therapy. I would treat Neurolinguistic Programming as the main hub for many of them though. Its a subject that seems to be the main pseudoscientific umbrella that is used by most of them to give the false impression of scientific appearance. Its incredibly widespread and extremely misleading to the less scientifically literate. Here is a good source; [1]. Phloem (talk) 05:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

anyone who wants to work on this complex of article, I'll be glad to help. Time we got to the pseudo-psychology. DGG (talk) 21:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

try Eisner in The death of psychotherapy, Chapter 3 "Cathartic Therapies:From Primal to est". A little out of date but .... Fainites ^barley 22:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

• coral calcium. I just put in some references, but there is a lot more that can be done. That someone would think that coral calcium can be used as a panacea for all types of cancer when in fact excess calcium can, in some cases, be detrimental to certain cancer treatments means that we should be very careful how the claims of the coral calcium fanatics are treated. ScienceApologist (talk) 21:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
• Mannatech. An article about a company that purveys sugars, calling them health products (glyconutrients). Antelan^talk 02:39, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Medical articles

Below are articles that I believe, along with any trusted science and medicine editors who may wish to contribute, meet the simple test of being well-written, do not give undue weight to fringe theories, and are either WP:GA or WP:FA:

• Alzheimer's Disease
• Rotavirus

Salacious talk of eye-candy on my page is not permitted..

Ye gods man, I am a pillar of the community and cannot be seen to engage in salacious talk of eye-candy, I mean really there are much better candidates than her....(cold shower, cough splutter...bbbbbbbbrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr).....if you like intellectual sci-fi you must have seen this though --> The Lost Room. highly recommended. :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 04:43, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Twinkle mis-use

I've taken the unusual action of removing Twinkle from your monobook.js page. It appears you've been mis-using it, specifically using on your talk page and on articles inappropriately. Please do not re-add it to your monobook subpage, or that page will be protected. Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

What the fuck????OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 01:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

You know how it works OM. You piss off one admin and they get another one to run in and punish you for some stupid menial thing. Baegis (talk) 02:01, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't even know who this little creep is? I do not misuse Twinkle. I'd like for this meglomaniac prove it to someone that I'm misusing the tool. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 02:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Pretty sure McBride is referring to you using TW to revert the whitewash of the Picard article. They don't like it when you use that on an admin, even if they make a phenomenally poor edit on an article. Baegis (talk) 02:07, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I would sincerely beseech both of you to reconsider and refactor your comments. A response like this to a sysop action is not going to win people over, to say the least. Thanks. Vassyana (talk) 02:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Nope. This is unfair, immature, and vindictive. The edits were plainly whitewashing to remove Rosalind Picard's support of Intelligent design. I do not misuse Twinkle, and in fact, stated my point plainly and clearly, as I have done with probably 10,000 edits using Twinkle. There was no warning, no anything. How about desysopping the person who did this. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 02:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)