User talk:ABenis: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:35, 6 November 2006

License tagging for Image:Lavater1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lavater1.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

First try at Mendelian Table/AMB (neophyte)

N	N -- -- NA -- -- -- -- --	"	"	"	"	"
A	N -- -- NA -- -- 0 A	-- -- -- NA -- -- -- A	"	"	"	"
NP	N NP -- NA NPA -- -- --	N NP P NA NPA PA 0 A	N NP -- NA NPA -- -- --	"	"	"
NA	N -- -- NA -- -- -- --	-- -- -- NA -- -- -- A	N NP -- NA NPA -- -- --	-- -- -- NA -- -- -- --	"	"
PA	N NP P NA NPA PA 0 A	-- -- -- NA NPA PA -- A	N NP P NA NPA PA 0 A	-- -- -- NA NPA PA -- A	-- -- -- NA NPA PA -- A	"
NPA	N NP -- NA NPA -- -- --	-- -- -- NA NPA PA -- A	N NP -- NA NPA -- -- --	-- -- -- NA NPA -- -- --	-- -- -- NA NPA PA -- A	-- -- -- NA NPA -- -- --
FATHER OR MOTHER	N	A	NP	NA	PA	NPA

Nomination for good article status

D-Katana asked for me feedback. Looks informative, don't have time to understand it right now. But right off the bat... more soothing colors could be used. Keep up the good work. - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 19:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have altered colour. Will do screen shot and reduce size of table via jpg image as suggested by D-Katana. AMB

Citation policy

Some information about citations can be found at WP:CITE or WP:FOOTNOTE. I have seen ibid used before in articles.

I see that you have already figured out how to use the <ref name="THENAME"> property. There are several different ways to handle such a case involving citing a book multiple times - there isn't quite a preferred format yet for such cases, so it is usually up to the editor to decide.

You can use the ref name thing to cite the book multiple times, and then hide the page numbers within the refs (only the content from the first occurence of a ref will appear underneath the "Notes" section) - like ^[1] ^[1].
You could use harvard referencing. I've never really tried to use that yet, but pretty much you use {{Harvard citation}}, and then tag the book underneath the "References" section with the {{Harvard reference}}.
Or you can just use ibid pp. 17-23, which is probably the simplest way.

^ ^a ^b Blah, blah. The title. Rest of citation information Cite error: The named reference "blah" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).

Regards, AndyZ _t 13:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, ABenis, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! AndyZ _t 13:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding fixing copyright tag

Hello. As a neophyte I have been involved with some editing with D-Katana of an article on Karen Horney, the noted psychiatrist. In the course of a peer review of another article it was flagged that the image of Karen Horney was improperly tagged for copyright. The image had originally been imported to Wikipedia:fr and then imported to Commons.

By email I contacted Dr. Horney’s daughter, who confirmed that she has been responsible for requests of photos of her mother for over fifty years, and that the photographer of the image in question is unknown.

The image has been widely archived (Bettmann Archives, United Press International) and distributed worldwide without attribution, and is clearly in the public domain.

How exactly do I go about fixing the tagging of the WP image, to fulfill WP’s exacting standards?

Thanks. ABenis 18:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Karen Horney1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Karen Horney1.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Where would you rather be?

I was just pondering this one when I noticed you around and editing, do you belong in Narcissism, or Narcissism (psychology)?

My thinking, is that, on balance, as your use of the word Narcissism is totally unrelated to the usual use of the word in psychology you belong in Narcissism but it's your call? --Zeraeph 20:30, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even so, as you are around I think you get to input into which page you are mentioned on!

It is unproven, and to be honest I don't really agree with you (which is a personal opinion and not relevant to any article here), but my point is more that, in your theory, you are making a totally different and new use of the word Narcissism to anything usually associated with psychology or psychoanalysis. So I cannot decide which article such innovation best belongs in. The only deciding factor, at present, being that even though it is a theory of psychology your use of the word "Narcissism" is so "similar but different" that it can be confusing if related to other psychological theories of Narcissism.--Zeraeph 23:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah but which page should have Herr Freud? (he is now on Narcissism (psychology));o)

I pretty much agree with your thinking, particularly with regard to Karen Horney so I have added your line. --Zeraeph 01:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That looks kinda good doesn't it? Take a look. --Zeraeph 02:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't be more thrilled to be "Number One" on MTV, not for me personally though (it wasn't my idea really, it was D-Katana's), but to finally see a broader definition of Narcissism in a prominent place, where it BELONGS! ;o) --Zeraeph 12:26, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cast an eye over Narcissism (psychology)?

Hi again...I'd really appreciate it if you cast an eye over this from time to time and let me know if you spot any howlers in my attempts to rewrite this article accurately and in plain English? I'm a bit fuzzy over whether object-libido/object-love or ego-libido/self-love/narcissism are as synonymous as I am making them out to be at present? --Zeraeph 18:03, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you remind me of my shame, I have loads on Karen Horney that I have to go through to revise her section of article properly, and I haven't got round to it (why? Your guess is as good as mine) in weeks. Which is odd because while researching the section I found myself becoming very fond of the person she was.

I THINK that picture is in "commons"? But I have had problems transferring pictures to/from foreign languae before, and when I do the only solution seems to be to download and reupload into destination language. I am guessing you want French? I tried to upload it for you but I'd have to create an account (AND figure out how to fill in the licencing details en Francais which is way beyond me :o( ) so here is upload page: *http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload and if you click on image you will see all copyright details.

Yes, that little bit at the end was really ODD. I was leaving it there until the editor in question moved on and forgot about it, because it was the kind of addition an angry 15 year old gamer might try to defend if challenged. Over time I have come to realise that here, sometimes the BEST approach is to wait till they have forgotten, then revert VERY quietly. --Zeraeph 07:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Karen Horney

Again, the voice of my conscience...I still haven't touched the K Horney article or added much to Narcissism (psychology). I plead the most fabulous summer we have had in 10 years and the garden and mountains calling me every time I sit down to do something useful.

A Wikipedia article is supposed to show references for the information. Obviously the whole article is derived from the remarkable Bernhard Paris, and that reference is at the bottom...but currently there is an (IMHO totally OCD) trend for demanding inline (inserted into the text with code so that they appear at the bottom of page) citations every sentence complete with page numbers. I'm off for weekend break but when I get back maybe I can find some other references. --Zeraeph 00:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Deletion: Anthony M. Benis and NPA personality theory

Articles that you have been involved in editing, Anthony M. Benis and NPA personality theory, have been listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony M. Benis. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in whether it should be deleted. Thank you. --Psychonaut 04:48, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ABenis, I'm sorry to hear that you think this deletion debate shows Wikipedians to be lacking in friendliness and open-mindedness. The original announcement was framed in tentative language and openly solicited contrary evidence. Indeed, some of the participants in this debate have been bending over backwards to uncover any shred of evidence (in the form of citations, publications, etc.) which would support the inclusion of these articles on Wikipedia. We have so far come up empty-handed. As the primary author of these articles and of the NPA personality theory, you are undoubtedly the single most qualified person to provide us with the evidence we need to prove that these articles meet Wikipedia's standards for notability, accuracy, and verifiability. If you sincerely believe that these two articles belong on Wikipedia, I implore you to give us some third-party reviews, citations, case studies, sales figures for your book—in short, anything at all which would support the assertion that you and NPA personality theory are widely recognized as important in the fields of psychology and genetics. —Psychonaut 04:58, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images for deletion

The following images you uploaded have been proposed for speedy deletion because they do not meet Wikipedia's copyright licensing requirements, because they are redundant with each other, and because they are copies of an image which was previously deleted (see above):

—Psychonaut 22:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An apology of sorts

Hi. It's very unlikely that we've ever met at Wikipedia, but I recently came across the story of NPA personality theory and decided to post about it on my blog. That posting has not received considerable attention at Slashdot, and unfortunately my original, sensationalist summary at that website cannot be altered after publication.

So, as a result, I realise that this post may be unfair and humiliating to you, which was not my original intention. As such, I would like to offer you this barnstar for the damage done.

I'm sorry that the misrepresentation was the one that was published. I've re-written part of the post to more accurately reflect the truth, but I'm fully aware of the effects the original post will have had. Daveydweeb (^chat/_patch) 10:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[blah-1] Blah, blah. The title. Rest of citation information Cite error: The named reference "blah" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).

[1]

@@ Line 193: / Line 193: @@
 *[[:Image:Karen Horney.smallJ.jpg]]
 —[[User:Psychonaut|Psychonaut]] 22:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
+== An apology of sorts ==
+[[Image:Purple Star.png|thumb|right|For blogging carelessly.]]
+Hi. It's very unlikely that we've ever met at Wikipedia, but I recently came across the story of [[NPA personality theory]] and decided to [http://daveydweeb.com/2006/11/05/long-term-wikipedia-vandalism-exposed/ post] about it on my blog. That posting has not received considerable attention at [[Slashdot]], and unfortunately my original, sensationalist summary at that website cannot be altered after publication.
+So, as a result, I realise that this post may be unfair and humiliating to you, which was not my original intention. As such, I would like to offer you this barnstar for the damage done.
+I'm sorry that the misrepresentation was the one that was published. I've re-written part of the post to more accurately reflect the truth, but I'm fully aware of the effects the original post will have had. [[User:Daveydweeb|Daveydw]]<font color="green">[[User:Daveydweeb/Esperanza|ee]]</font>[[User:Daveydweeb|b]] (<span style="font-size: smaller;"><sup>[[User talk:Daveydweeb|'''chat''']]</sup>/<sub>[[Wikipedia:Editor review/RandyWang 2|'''patch''']]</sub></span>) 10:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)