User talk:Dendodge

Welcome!

FOR HELP WITH ANYTHING WIKI, CLICK HERE. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help

This is my talk page. Feel free to ask any questions or engage in general discussion with me. Just click the + button at the top to add your comment. I will reply on YOUR talk page if possible and please reply to that on mine. Thanks, George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help

Tag closed discussions with: {{resolved}} -- ~~~~.

Don't forget to sign your name with 4 tildes! (~~~~) (A tilde is ⇧Shift-# on a standard English keyboard)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Dendodge! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Ale_Jrb^talk 22:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

AWB

I'm afraid that your application to use AutoWikiBrowser has been refused. The reason for this is that AWB is an extremely powerful tool that can cause significant damage in inexperienced hands. Please feel free to reapply when you have passed the 500 edit mark. Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

Hello George. Thank you for the adoption invitation. Gratefully accepted.

You should be aware, though, that I have 10,000 and one questions to ask. However, I don’t have anything particularly articulate to ask you at this moment.

I keep getting lost in the endless maze of discussions and policies and guidance pages etc. I’m trying to organise my thoughts on how to proceed. Any advice on how to tackle all that?

Basically (in brief – else it would be a very long email):

Things I am interested in:

• Wikifying articles. I wikified this into this. How did I do?
• Categorizing images in Wikimedia Commons, any other image-related projects.
• “Beautifying” pages.
• Assessing new pages.
• Tackling vandalism – I loathe it, although occasionally find it quite humorous.
• The Gambia. I’d love to see a more comprehensive coverage. Two problems arise for me: a) I'm not there at the moment and feel a bit distant from the subject; b) I'm aware of ethnocentricity issues. How would I go about collaborating with other users more qualified to deal with (b)?

Things I am struggling to comprehend:

• Wiki-code. I’ve been practising on my user page by cannibalising other people’s user pages and testing them on my own page – with mixed success. I consider myself to have intermediate HTML skills, so hopefully this will become more clear in time.
• Templates - creating them, using them, where to put them.
• File management and structure
• Applying categories, especially for images.
• Licenses for images.
• Lots of other things that I can't think of at the moment.

Thanks again for your offer of help. Hope I'm not asking too much. I'll get back to you when I've got something more concrete to ask you about. Annatto (talk) 22:59, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

• Nothing personal but I wonder whether Dendodge has sufficient experience of wikipedia to adopt a user at this stage of their wiki career. Spartaz ^Humbug! 23:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Criterion validity Perris Union High School District Targum Onkelos Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh Cola wars Archaeology of the Americas Ashland High School (Ohio) Naruto Effective population size American Overseas School of Rome Roger Arnebergh FIFA World Rankings Krum High School Peakhurst Public School Straightway School Cool (aesthetic) La Salle College Cyprus Mathematical Olympiad Halo 3

Cleanup Holy Cross Convent School Domain name system Gizzard Merge High-definition Lakeland High School (Lakeland, Florida) AOL Add Sources Virginity Yixian Formation Lady Margaret School Wikify Louis Farrakhan California School for the Deaf, Fremont St David's Cathedral Expand York Community High School Emeric of Hungary Scanimate

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

About Coat of arms of Catalonia

You seem to have abandoned the discussion in Coat of arms of Catalonia, probably because I forgot to explain the problem for 3rd parties. Now I have written a list with the main problems on the talk page. --Jotamar (talk) 12:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

File:Hersfold.JPG	Thanks!
So, yeah, you know how these work... »»»» Thank you very much for your support in my recent RfA, which closed with a final tally of (75/1/0). Your trust in me is greatly appreciated, and I can assure you it has not been misplaced. I shall use these tools to the best of my ability, and will do my best not to let you down. Thank you once again, and happy editing as always! Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Positive Discipline

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Positive Discipline, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Positive Discipline. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Simulation graphics

I am totally satisfied with u that simulation means virtual reality. But I want a big note on how simulation is concerned specially with the computer graphics.Amit bit2009 (talk) 11:27, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Rorschach mediation

I completely understand that you may have an opinion different that mine and that is why you closed the Rorschach image case. The thing that I am disappointed about is not that you used your personal criteria or anything like that, what else could you use. But that you did not engage me. If you refer to my case, my biggest complaint was the lack of communication, that once people thought of an objection they would not be open to discuss it with me. I understand that the wikipedia has no option but to work on the basis of consensus. And for that reason communication ought to be fundamental. At this point I do not know if you read my arguments of why WP:CENSOR does not apply in this case, or which one did you read, or maybe you read the 3 archives of talk page. Or if you thought the arguments were wrong. Closing the case like this is understandable from the arbitration committee, they have to make decisions because previous mediation steps already failed. But a you guys can take a little time with the parties and hopefully prevent cases from going to arbitration. --Dela Rabadilla (talk) 13:05, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

From the way it was worded it seemed that you wanted to remove the images.

I do not think that image removal implies censorship. There is lots of content removed from the wikipedia with no mention of censorship.--Dela Rabadilla (talk) 13:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Why do you think the material should be removed?

I'll write this backwards. The reason I think the censorship objection does not stand is because according to the wikipedia article 3 parties are required publisher, public and censor. China censors the wikipedia. I think what is happening is that we think of things that actual religious or political groups would censor, and we apply the word censorship. But when I enter the wikipedia as an editor I become part of the publisher and the publisher cannot censor itself. Again according the wikipedia article, a publisher could self-censor if it feels that he may be censored. But that is not the case here either. You may think "So what about the policy, nothing can be censored then". After reading the policy several times I think it actually agrees with this argument. It explains why censorship cannot happen by the very nature of the wikipedia, and I think it addresses the possible expectation from some people that a wikipedia censor should exist. You may also think "what about clear cases like the Mohammad image". I think that we can talk about how this is censored in other places, but ultimately it is an arbitrary consensus decision by the community of editors of the article. Secondly, there is policy that says that images should be removed if they are considered shocking or explicit, from this I gather that policy makers understood that there are cases that warrant removal or replacement of images. The judgment of images as shocking is completely arbitrary. In this case I think the original rorschach inkblot is inappropriate for the wikipedia, because it harms people. I already extended myself. I think that if you don't believe that this image produces harm you will most likely default to leaving the case closed. So if you have doubts on whether the image causes harm or not please let me know.--Dela Rabadilla (talk) 14:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

How does it cause harm? I actually like looking at them. I don't see how an inkblot could offend anyone.

It causes harm the same way that interfering with a cancer test may cause harm. The diagnosis may be that the patient does not have cancer and the proper treatment or medication would not be provided, needless to say the consequences can be very negative. I say it is the same way, because the Rorschach is used by the medical community routinely for diagnosis. I know it is unexpected to hear that looking at an image could have such impact. I know of cases in mental hospitals were long held diagnosis and medications changed thanks to insights gained once the Rorschach test was administered. Lets examine this for a moment, the fundamental premise of a high school test is that all students have not seen the test prior to the exam so they don't just study the answers to the questions. The fundamental premise of the Rorschach test is that the subject has not seen the inkblots before, so their answers more closely reflect what is on their mind. As is, this premise poses research problems for retesting. But general availability of original inkblots with no time limit presents a much bigger problem. Even worse is the possibility that others might suggest answers and subjects might change the answers given during testing. We can elaborate if the harm has already been done by other websites, currently this test is still being used by the health services community around the world.

I don't think the images offend anyone, but if policy writers already think we should remove images if they are shocking of explicit (maybe that is why you mention offensiveness), then I don't see why we wouldn't do it if they cause harm. For a different situation where images cause harm see the article on Photosensitive epilepsy.--24.174.8.32 (talk) 17:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)