Jump to content

User talk:Tryptofish: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎RR: you're welcome
Line 70: Line 70:
Hello, and thanks so much for your kind response and editing help in the description of the Crucifixion painting in [[Crucifixion in the arts]]. I enjoy going through various articles and hope to do more editing. --[[User:Rakiramo|Rakiramo]] ([[User talk:Rakiramo|talk]][[User:Rakiramo|Rakiramo]] ([[User talk:Rakiramo|talk]]) 21:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello, and thanks so much for your kind response and editing help in the description of the Crucifixion painting in [[Crucifixion in the arts]]. I enjoy going through various articles and hope to do more editing. --[[User:Rakiramo|Rakiramo]] ([[User talk:Rakiramo|talk]][[User:Rakiramo|Rakiramo]] ([[User talk:Rakiramo|talk]]) 21:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
:That's great! Welcome aboard. --[[User:Tryptofish|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish#top|talk]]) 13:28, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
:That's great! Welcome aboard. --[[User:Tryptofish|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish#top|talk]]) 13:28, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

==Wikibombing MfD==

Might I suggest that you change your "Keep on condition" ... to "Delete unless..."? Your !vote is really for deletion unless editors take a particular course of action (i.e. your default if that doesn't happen is to delete it); I think it would be helpful to make this clearer. [[User:Prioryman|Prioryman]] ([[User talk:Prioryman|talk]]) 14:32, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:32, 25 June 2011

Newsletters.
Check RfAs.
WP:ADREV.
Statistics on most-viewed neuroscience pages.
User:Skysmith/Missing topics about Neurology
Commons:Category:Smilies

Adminship?

Hi there Tryptofish. I just had this crazy idea that you might want to think about. I was wondering if you'd ever be interested in being an admin. You seem experienced and clueful enough. Unless you've got any hidden skeletons, I'd be happy to nominate you if you'd like. Let me know if you're interested. AD 23:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aiken, and thank you so very much! I am very flattered by what you said. I'm going to say "no thank you", for the time being, while leaving the door open for later on, like maybe a year from now. In brief, I personally do not feel ready for it yet, and I'm at a stage in real life when I temporarily cannot offer the project the additional time that this would take. I can explain all of that at greater length if you'd like, but that's the WP:KISS version. But sometime later: who knows. Thank you again for the very kind words. Best, --Tryptofish (talk) 00:05, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even though I've archived subsequent talk threads, I'm intentionally leaving this thread at the top of my talk page. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2011 (UTC) [reply]

reply at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case

Hi, just to respond, thanks I saw your comment, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 21:54, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Well, I guess I can say the, uh, stuff, has really hit the fan. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:59, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, best regards to you Tryptofish - I have always found you NPOV and Clueful and if and when you feel ready and have the time, I will support your RFA without a worry. Off2riorob (talk) 22:23, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Tryptofish

Your assistance is greatly appreciated - I apologize for the delay in getting back to you but I have been overseas for a few months and have just plucked up enough courage to have another attempt at fixing this entry. I will certainly be in touch again if necessary 2BPKP (talk) 06:50, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome, and of course just let me know if you run into any problems. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:22, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the headsup

I know you warned me against taking on the atheism lead definition discussion. But I thought I might see how far I can push it. :) 21:57, 16 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielkueh (talkcontribs) 21:57, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! It was only a headsup, not an attempt to discourage. Enjoy! --Tryptofish (talk) 21:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read my comment on Talk:Judaism and violence. It references last year's contentious discussion over Christianity and violence and presents the insight that I took away from that discussion. I concluded from last year's discussion that the issue was that any attempt to discuss only the examples of violence was going to cause some people to feel that there was a POV imbalance prejudging the question of whether Christianity is a violent religion. (I obviously didn't share this perspective but I came to see that other people such as you, Noleander and Tirronan might feel this way so I figured it was worth accomodating your POV rather than continuing the dispute.) You may not have reached the same conclusion that I did but I figured I'd share my view with you and perhaps open a dialogue. --Pseudo-Richard (talk) 14:49, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented there. And please don't ask Noleander to get involved in this. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:26, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Economic antisemitism

(NB: Much of the text below is copied from a discussion over at User talk:Jayjg.)

I wonder if you would take a look at a draft article that I'm working on. If this looks familiar, it is because I started by taking Noleander's Jews and money article and hacking at it, throwing out a lot of irrelevant and even dubious material but keeping stuff that was relevant to the topic. (see the edit summaries to get a sense for what I mean). The more I work with Noleander's Jews and money text, the more I stumble over problematic passages.

The thing is... the Antisemitism article doesn't really take on the issues head-on and give them adequate treatment. My proposed article will do that but I need some feedback as to whether my draft article is headed in the right direction and I would really appreciate input as to how to improve it.

I am particularly concerned about the section titled "Historical development" which I suspect may be too long and too detailed. Still, I didn't want to throw it all out without getting some input from other editors.

IMO, there was a lot of good information in Noleander's original Jews and money article but it was unfortunately mixed in with a lot of really dubious stuff. IMO, the decision to delete Jews and money was based on the conclusion that it was better to just start all over. I didn't agree completely but, after working with the text for several weeks, I can see the validity of that view. I think the first lesson I learned is that there is something encyclopedic to say about "Jews and money" and/or "Jews and banking" but it's really hard to do right and so I've put that effort on the backburner.

Instead, I've been peeling off little chunks of useful stuff, reading it several times and adding my own writing. Results of this effort have been the creation of History of investment banking in the United States, Jewish views of poverty, wealth and charity, Jewish stereotypes in literature and Port Jew. In addition, I have expanded Jewish stereotypes and Dearborn Independent.

Any help you can give me would be much appreciated.

--Pseudo-Richard (talk) 16:33, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking me, Richard. For the next week or so, I will only be editing sporadically, because I am traveling. Just off the top of my head, the title sounds odd to me, because I don't really think it's about economics, but rather about antisemitism based upon money-related canards. I'll give it more attention later. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the terms "economic antisemitism" and "Economic Jew" (to a lesser extent) are used in the scholarly literature. Search for them using Google Books. Then take a look at the "Forms" section of Antisemitism and the lead to my draft article. It is definitely NOT a term that I made up. I was pleased to find this term and the significant literature around it because it helps to make a case that this is not OR but the subject of serious scholarly analysis (a point that Noleander tried to make but was unable to because of other factors in play at the time). After the Enlightenment and the emancipation of Jews, religious antisemitism diminished but economic antisemitism continued well into the 20th century. Read the article when you get in a chance. As you are fond of saying, "there is no deadline" so I can wait "a week or so" for your response. I'm just trying to avoid triggering knee-jerk reactions from other Wikipedia editors. Better to keep the article "under construction" longer than to provoke an AFD, RFC or worse. --Pseudo-Richard (talk) 21:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good! And I especially agree with that last sentence! --Tryptofish (talk) 13:18, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Hi, I mentioned your post here. Tony (talk) 17:24, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. It's a pity that people make so much drama over such things. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:24, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RR

Hello, and thanks so much for your kind response and editing help in the description of the Crucifixion painting in Crucifixion in the arts. I enjoy going through various articles and hope to do more editing. --Rakiramo (talkRakiramo (talk) 21:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's great! Welcome aboard. --Tryptofish (talk) 13:28, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibombing MfD

Might I suggest that you change your "Keep on condition" ... to "Delete unless..."? Your !vote is really for deletion unless editors take a particular course of action (i.e. your default if that doesn't happen is to delete it); I think it would be helpful to make this clearer. Prioryman (talk) 14:32, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]