Talk:Rorschach test/Index of archives

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2006-03-19[edit]

Archive link for 2006-03-19T04:26:43Z (diff)
  • Naive skeptics

2007-11-02[edit]

Archive link for 2007-11-02T12:13:38Z (diff)
  • More on methods of interpretation
  • Conflicting sentences
  • My $0.02
  • Is this a Freudian test ?
  • Rohrschach, not Rorschach!
  • SPOV (the Swiss point of view)
  • Naive skeptics
  • Seeing Nothing
  • Outrage
  • Inkblot
  • The Ro(h)rschach name Discussion
  • Under methods...
  • Recent major change
  • NPOV in controversy section
  • Pronounciation of Rorschach
  • Keeping the inkblots secret
  • External link is broken
Archive link for 2007-11-02T12:22:44Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Ultraexactzz
  • Summary: "fix'd archive link, removing additional archived material (through July 31 2007), moving misplaced comments, noting the archive"
  • Sections removed:
  • Deletion discussion
  • Which image

2007-11-14[edit]

Archive link for 2007-11-14T10:18:32Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:LKirkby
  • Summary: "/* Copyright */ should be own section"
  • Sections removed:
  • Serious ethical problem: heads in the sand

2008-02-27[edit]

Archive link for 2008-02-27T19:19:42Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Hmwith
  • Summary: "/* Straw poll on the inkblot image */ (to gain consensus)"
  • Sections removed:
  • Straw poll on the inkblot image
Archive link for 2008-02-27T19:22:18Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Hmwith
  • Summary: "/* Straw poll on the inkblot image (to gain consensus) */ make it all one section, put a&b, gray, made your vote just say 1 once (if you don't mind)"
  • Sections removed:
  • Image should not be hidden & there should be no disclaimer

2008-03-03[edit]

Archive link for 2008-03-03T10:20:39Z (diff)
  • Oh freddy
Archive link for 2008-03-03T15:49:00Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Fredrick day
  • Summary: "this is not a talkpage and any comments not related to the article subject can and will be removed - I seem to have attracted a "fan" and frankly I'd rather not encourage them."
  • Sections removed:
  • Oh freddy
Archive link for 2008-03-03T17:38:54Z (diff)
  • Oh

2008-03-04[edit]

Archive link for 2008-03-04T02:00:03Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Bryan Derksen
  • Summary: "archiving some of the older material"
  • Sections removed:
  • Deeper reasons for Rorschach inkblot test controversy
  • "Bibliometric" data on Exner
  • Level of abstraction
  • Writing speed
  • Videotaped sessions?
  • No reason to hide images
  • Current situation appropriate
  • Should the image of the first pic of the Rorschach inkblot test be hidden?
  • Thank you for clarifying
  • Steady on chaps
  • We could have a consensus here if.....
  • Another problem with posting the picture
  • References
  • Please come to a consensus
  • Page protected
  • Enough!
  • Even the International Rorschach Foundation themselves are showing all ten images on the web
  • Comment by 207.160.240.251
  • Please stop editwarring

2008-03-07[edit]

Archive link for 2008-03-07T23:49:40Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Dela Rabadilla
  • Summary: "/* Outrageous straw man for the straw poll */"
  • Sections removed:
  • The image is already public

2008-03-14[edit]

Archive link for 2008-03-14T04:33:09Z (diff)
  • Copyright Issues regarding Images
  • Archive
  • Question on Reaching Resolution
  • Copyright
  • Rationale and Scope for Image Display
  • Serious ethical problem: heads in the sand
  • Pronunciation of Rorschach
  • Framing the Criticism
  • The question of the display of the picture and Wikipedia Censorship
  • Harmfulness of image publication.
  • RfC: Should Original Rorshach test inkblot be replaced
  • Precedents
  • Original research objection
  • Not the same information objection
  • No harm is produced objection
  • Already in other websites objection
  • Consensus objection
  • Click [show] (or here) to view the first card in the test (may invalidate the test).
  • Removal of reference to Society for Personality Assessment
  • Accessibility to image
  • Controversy
  • why is there an image hidden in breach of policy on NPOV, discliamer, censorship etc?
  • Straw poll on the inkblot image (to gain consensus)
  • interesting paper
  • Wikipedia Guideline Review
  • Poll: Who is willing to go to mediation?
  • Stop the Edit War

2009-03-22[edit]

Archive link for 2009-03-22T20:36:04Z (diff)
  • A more general discussion ?
  • What about the article itself ?
  • Oh
  • Method
  • Outrageous straw man for the straw poll
  • The image is already public
  • Unhide Picture
  • Straw poll on mediation
  • What is next on mediation
  • Case for not showing the original inkblots
  • Case for showing the original inkblots
  • scroll
  • Rorschach Images have been in public domain for 50 Years
  • New lead image
  • Image Discussion
  • It is wikipedia policy to remove images arbitrarily
  • Neutrality tag
  • psychopathy is not psychosis
  • Pareidolia
  • Location of the inkblot image

2009-04-26[edit]

Archive link for 2009-04-26T03:18:31Z (diff)
  • entire

2009-04-28[edit]

Archive link for 2009-04-28T22:37:28Z (diff)
  • A more general discussion ?
  • What about the article itself ?
  • Oh
  • Method
  • Outrageous straw man for the straw poll
  • The image is already public
  • Unhide Picture
  • Straw poll on mediation
  • What is next on mediation
  • Case for not showing the original inkblots
  • Case for showing the original inkblots
  • scroll
  • Rorschach Images have been in public domain for 50 Years
  • New lead image
  • Image Discussion
  • It is wikipedia policy to remove images arbitrarily
  • Neutrality tag
  • psychopathy is not psychosis
  • Pareidolia

2009-05-06[edit]

Archive link for 2009-05-06T00:08:13Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Chillum
  • Summary: "/* section break */"
  • Sections removed:
  • section break
Archive link for 2009-05-06T00:25:41Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Ward3001
  • Summary: "/* Analysis of discussion */ better heading"
  • Sections removed:
  • Analysis of discussion
Archive link for 2009-05-06T00:38:35Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Chillum
  • Summary: "/* Chillum's analysis of discussion */"
  • Sections removed:
  • Chillum's analysis of discussion
Archive link for 2009-05-06T14:40:42Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Chillum
  • Summary: "several people are interpreting the discussion now, not just me"
  • Sections removed:
  • Chillum's analysis of discussion
Archive link for 2009-05-06T21:49:26Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Faustian
  • Summary: "/* What is Consenus? */"
  • Sections removed:
  • What is Consenus?

2009-05-25[edit]

Archive link for 2009-05-25T13:18:15Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Page break */ change header name to "arbitrary" break"
  • Sections removed:
  • Page break

2009-05-27[edit]

Archive link for 2009-05-27T22:41:42Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Faustian
  • Summary: "/* New consensus is disputed */"
  • Sections removed:
  • New consensus is disputed

2009-05-28[edit]

Archive link for 2009-05-28T01:16:44Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* May or may not be new consensus */ 3L"
  • Sections removed:
  • May or may not be new consensus

2009-05-29[edit]

Archive link for 2009-05-29T13:09:45Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "cutting content from a few threads inactive since 22 may & prior & archived to Talk:Rorschach test/Archive 5. I have left headers in place with pointers. if anything still needs discussed, copy a comment or two back here and continue from there"
  • Sections removed:
  • Article Title
Archive link for 2009-05-29T13:25:11Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* May or may not be new consensus */ not really needing a 3L here."
  • Sections removed:
  • May or may not be new consensus

2009-06-04[edit]

Archive link for 2009-06-04T15:47:58Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Chillum
  • Summary: "This is the topic of at least half the thread"
  • Sections removed:
  • How many inkblot images

2009-06-08[edit]

Archive link for 2009-06-08T12:53:50Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "some more archiving to further reduce the load of this talk page"
  • Sections removed:
  • summary of method section, please
  • Arbitrary break

2009-06-09[edit]

Archive link for 2009-06-09T19:08:10Z (diff)
  • Location of the inkblot image
  • RFC: Top Image - Hermann Rorschach or first card of the Rorschach inkblot test?
  • section break
  • Interpretation of discussion
  • Archive's missing
  • What is Consensus?
  • Another compromise
  • Other pages with controversial images
  • New consensus has emerged

2009-06-11[edit]

Archive link for 2009-06-11T15:05:14Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Chillum
  • Summary: "(irony)"
  • Sections removed:
  • Moving on...

2009-06-16[edit]

Archive link for 2009-06-16T15:13:16Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* The ten inkblots of the Rorschach inkblot test */ subsec"
  • Sections removed:
  • The ten inkblots of the Rorschach inkblot test
Archive link for 2009-06-16T15:21:39Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Page protected */ subsec"
  • Sections removed:
  • Page protected

2009-06-17[edit]

Archive link for 2009-06-17T13:33:45Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "chrono move to move past the gallery and page protected note, re to renaissancee"
  • Sections removed:
  • Publish all 10 argument #01 - The cat's out of the bag
  • Publish all 10 argument #02 - No evidence of harm
  • Question
Archive link for 2009-06-17T13:37:39Z (diff)
  • Publish all 10 argument #01 - The cat's out of the bag
  • Publish all 10 argument #02 - No evidence of harm
Archive link for 2009-06-17T13:50:35Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Arguments concerning the inclusion of all 10 images */ let's keep this all under one subsec"
  • Sections removed:
  • Arguments concerning the inclusion of all 10 images
Archive link for 2009-06-17T14:46:51Z (diff)
  • The arbitrary break

2009-06-18[edit]

Archive link for 2009-06-18T03:47:42Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "1L no longer necessary"
  • Sections removed:
  • The discussion
  • The addendum
Archive link for 2009-06-18T04:24:03Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "archiving conversations inactive since june 3... left placeholders"
  • Sections removed:
  • So...

2009-06-19[edit]

Archive link for 2009-06-19T01:31:59Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Jmh649
  • Summary: "/* =Include */"
  • Sections removed:
  • Include
Archive link for 2009-06-19T01:32:12Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Jmh649
  • Summary: "/* Do not include= */"
  • Sections removed:
  • Do not include
Archive link for 2009-06-19T03:45:38Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Faustian
  • Summary: "/* Include */let's make these options absolutely clear"
  • Sections removed:
  • Include
  • Include in a Dropdown box
Archive link for 2009-06-19T23:55:03Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Danglingdiagnosis
  • Summary: "/* Use show/hide mode for Rorschach Test inkblots? */"
  • Sections removed:
  • Including all 10 Argument #5

2009-06-20[edit]

Archive link for 2009-06-20T15:36:07Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "removing header refs to consensus review and transcluded addendum, seems we've moved beyond that, archiving a thread with no comments since june 6"
  • Sections removed:
  • Too much James M. Wood, M. Teresa Nezworski, Scott O. Lilienfeld et al?
  • 2009 consensus review
  • The discussion
  • The addendum

2009-06-21[edit]

Archive link for 2009-06-21T01:06:11Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Bob K31416
  • Summary: "/* Inkblots: In a drop down box   versus   Not in a drop down box */"
  • Sections removed:
  • Inkblots: In a drop down box   versus   Not in a drop down box
Archive link for 2009-06-21T07:07:26Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "See WT:CON#Ethical. The word "ethical" did not appear until March 23, 2009. I've removed it as it appears to have been slipped in there without any discussion as to the propriety of the expansion in the scope of the policy."
  • Sections removed:
  • Inkblots: In a dropdown box   versus   Not in a dropdown box
Archive link for 2009-06-21T21:57:47Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Bob K31416
  • Summary: "format Technical and Harm sub-sections"
  • Sections removed:
  • Technical
  • Harm

2009-06-23[edit]

Archive link for 2009-06-23T06:48:15Z (diff)
  • Argument Con #2 - Interfering with the work of a health professional
Archive link for 2009-06-23T15:48:07Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* #02 - No evidence of harm - arb break */ subsec"
  • Sections removed:
  • #02 - No evidence of harm - arb break

2009-07-02[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-02T06:13:30Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Danglingdiagnosis
  • Summary: "/* Argument Con #1 - It may harm a psychologists ability to protect the welfare of his patient."
  • Sections removed:
  • Argument Con #1 - It may harm people

2009-07-04[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-04T15:08:18Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "archiving no comments since june 27"
  • Sections removed:
  • #02 - No evidence of harm - arb break
  • #06 Argument Pro - It doesn't matter if we publish. The test is nearly worthless anyway.
Archive link for 2009-07-04T15:23:20Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "archiving no comments since june 23"
  • Sections removed:
  • a bit off topic
  • back on topic
Archive link for 2009-07-04T22:09:04Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "removing some old archive pointers, split section on harm into new L2. archiving no conversations since june 23"
  • Sections removed:
  • Custody & patrole hearings
  • How many inkblot images / Discussion about consensus
  • Encyclopedia
  • Preference Versus Compromise Regarding the :Image: The Evidence
  • And now for something completely different...
  • Harm
  • Scrolling
  • For shame!
  • Arbitrary break
  • Arbitrary break II

2009-07-06[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-06T18:56:44Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Comments from others */ section ran long, breaking off"
  • Sections removed:
  • Comments from others
Archive link for 2009-07-06T19:00:46Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:DreamGuy
  • Summary: "/* Comments from regulars */ heading in general not helpful, responses to person not understanding NPOV policy"
  • Sections removed:
  • Comments from regulars
Archive link for 2009-07-06T19:06:04Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* RFC: Should the potential for harm to result inform our editorial decisions regarding encyclopedic content? */ re-add heading without "from regulars" as it now was under "points of order" tweaking header further down"
  • Sections removed:
  • Point of order
  • Comments from others

2009-07-10[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-10T03:04:10Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Jmh649
  • Summary: "/* #06 Argument Pro - It doesn't matter if we publish. The test is nearly worthless anyway. */"
  • Sections removed:
  • #06 Argument Pro - It doesn't matter if we publish. The test is nearly worthless anyway.
Archive link for 2009-07-10T12:25:43Z (diff)
  • US Coppyright law

2009-07-13[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-13T20:20:06Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Tanao
  • Summary: "/* The ten inkblots of the Rorschach inkblot test */"
  • Sections removed:
  • The ten inkblots of the Rorschach inkblot test
Archive link for 2009-07-13T20:40:08Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "talk page needs another good haircut, but this will have to do for now."
  • Sections removed:
  • Include Not In a Dropdown box
  • Include in a Dropdown box
  • Do not include
  • Comments
  • Inkblots: In a dropdown box   versus   Not in a dropdown box
  • Technical
  • Scrolling
Archive link for 2009-07-13T20:46:52Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Are all 10 inkblots really necessary? */ archiving, no comments since july 7"
  • Sections removed:
  • Examples of the three types of inkblots

2009-07-14[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-14T03:50:04Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Arguments Con */ trying out a subpaged discussion style, all involved editors for any of the 1-6 arguments con discussions please watchlist Talk:Rorschach test/2009-06 Arguments Con. some portions will be transcluded here for ease of use"
  • Sections removed:
  • Argument Con #1 - It may harm a psychologist's ability to protect the welfare of his/her patient.
  • Argument Con #2 - It violates Wikipedia policy
  • Argument Con #3 - It interferes with the workings of another profession
  • Argument Con #4 - It violates Wikipedia policy on neutrality.
Archive link for 2009-07-14T04:02:25Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Superceded? */ strike that, :Someone has taken the RFC tag down. I think Dangling should incorporate the opinions of the people who respond to this RFC and try to make a more refined policy proposal after this one closes. Chillum 04:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)"[reply]
  • Sections removed:
  • Superceded?
Archive link for 2009-07-14T04:37:54Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "trimming the TOC a bit with ; headers instead of === under a section ==Recently archived discussions=="
  • Sections removed:
  • Use show/hide mode for Rorschach Test inkblots?
  • Including all 10 Argument #5
  • New expert sign-up section
  • Consensus
  • Old debate
  • Reverting, status quo, and survey re inkblots
  • An informal survey for the inclusion of the 10 inkblots
  • Harm
  • To be honest...
  • list of reliable sources mentioned here
  • We need an image of the test being administered
  • Are all 10 inkblots really necessary?
  • External links
  • False inkblot as the lead image
  • Just a suggestion
  • Is source for inkblots reliable?
Archive link for 2009-07-14T04:51:46Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "moving "Superceded?" to points of order, trim toc a bit"
  • Sections removed:
  • The ten inkblots of the Rorschach inkblot test
  • Page protected
  • Question
  • Recently archived discussions
Archive link for 2009-07-14T20:59:14Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:209.167.232.100
  • Summary: "/* #04 - removing the images amounts to censorship */"
  • Sections removed:
  • #04 - removing the images amounts to censorship
Archive link for 2009-07-14T21:35:28Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Streissand effect */ sp"
  • Sections removed:
Archive link for 2009-07-14T23:46:47Z (diff)
  • All 10 images
  • Arguments Pro
  • #01 - The cat's out of the bag
  • #02 - No evidence of harm
  • #03 - Adds to the page
  • #04 - Removing the images amounts to censorship
  • #05 - Reputable organizations have been showing the images, too
  • #06 Argument Pro - It doesn't matter if we publish. The test is nearly worthless anyway.
  • Arguments Con

2009-07-15[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-15T01:31:23Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:85.180.98.233
  • Summary: "/* #06 Argument Pro - It doesn't matter if we publish. The test is nearly worthless anyway. */"
  • Sections removed:
  • #06 Argument Pro - It doesn't matter if we publish. The test is nearly worthless anyway.
Archive link for 2009-07-15T01:31:52Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:85.180.98.233
  • Summary: "/* #06 It doesn't matter if we publish. The test is nearly worthless anyway. */"
  • Sections removed:
  • #06 It doesn't matter if we publish. The test is nearly worthless anyway.
Archive link for 2009-07-15T01:41:17Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Chillum
  • Summary: "Now that we actually have something new, this can be its own section"
  • Sections removed:
  • New arguments go here
  • David S Rohde argument
Archive link for 2009-07-15T04:37:18Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Chillum
  • Summary: "new stuff goes at the end"
  • Sections removed:
  • A quick reality check
Archive link for 2009-07-15T12:27:59Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "ironic that you feel your opinion is the most important. new comments at the bottom please. organization is chronological, norbased on signifncance."
  • Sections removed:
  • The importance of having a leg to stand on
Archive link for 2009-07-15T12:33:51Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* The importance of having a leg to stand on */ combine related"
  • Sections removed:
  • The importance of having a leg to stand on
Archive link for 2009-07-15T18:05:34Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Jmh649
  • Summary: "/* Proposal policy by Danglingdiagnosis */"
  • Sections removed:
  • Proposal policy by Danglingdiagnosis

2009-07-20[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-20T14:22:57Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "archiving no comments since july 13"
  • Sections removed:
  • Are there any new arguments?
Archive link for 2009-07-20T14:31:03Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* RFC: Should the potential for harm to result inform our editorial decisions regarding encyclopedic content? */ tweak"
  • Sections removed:
  • Comments from Dlabot
  • More comments
Archive link for 2009-07-20T15:20:09Z (diff)
  • #01 - The cat's out of the bag
  • #02 - No evidence of harm
  • #03 - Adds to the page
  • #04 - Removing the images amounts to censorship
  • #05 - Reputable organizations have been showing the images, too
  • #06 - It doesn't matter if we publish. The test is nearly worthless anyway.
Archive link for 2009-07-20T15:48:37Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "archiving no comments since 16 july"
  • Sections removed:
  • Proposed policy by Danglingdiagnosis
Archive link for 2009-07-20T15:49:09Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Proposed policy by Danglingdiagnosis */ didn't mean to L3 this"
  • Sections removed:
  • Proposed policy by Danglingdiagnosis
Archive link for 2009-07-20T16:06:05Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "combine related threads, archiving no comments since july 12"
  • Sections removed:
  • US Copyright law
  • Picture of Hermann Rorschach

2009-07-23[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-23T15:15:19Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "fmt"
  • Sections removed:
  • Response from SPA/ISR Representative
Archive link for 2009-07-23T15:29:21Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "relieving pressure on the table of contents"
  • Sections removed:
  • How many kicks at the can?
  • Inline citation for inkblots needed
  • A note to the newly arrived editors
  • Summary of archives
  • US Copyright law
  • Sockpuppet investigation
  • Lead para about ethics
  • Propose moving "removed the inkblot" debate to a sub page
  • Further Discussions
Archive link for 2009-07-23T15:37:34Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "RFC was a bit of a non-starter, i'm going to go ahead and withdraw it a bit early"
  • Sections removed:
  • Points of order
  • Comments
  • Comments - arb break 1
  • Comments - arb break 2
Archive link for 2009-07-23T15:39:08Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "fix"
  • Sections removed:
  • A request to the regulars regarding the below RFC
Archive link for 2009-07-23T15:54:55Z (diff)
  • Arguments Pro
  • Arguments Con
  • David S Rohde argument
  • Argument for general disclosure of testing materials (after an appropriate time)
  • Recognition
  • Response from SPA/ISR Representative
  • Sub-pages: policy and arguments
Archive link for 2009-07-23T15:56:04Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Recently archived discussions */ rm section, no longer really necessary. consult archives if you need to"
  • Sections removed:
  • Recently archived discussions
Archive link for 2009-07-23T16:38:34Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "relieving pressure on the table of contents"
  • Sections removed:
  • data on scientific status
  • A quick reality check
  • A new look at old arguments
  • Social Irresponsibility
  • Sanity Check
  • Lots of attention

2009-07-25[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-25T17:54:18Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Ward3001
  • Summary: "/* More misinformation */ restored my comment to it's appropriate subsection, inexplicably moved by Chillum. If I placed someone else's comments in a wrong subsection; no idea why Chillum moved."
  • Sections removed:
  • Discussion of recent additions
Archive link for 2009-07-25T18:18:23Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "re ward - on the greater good ... moving header above my comment/ useful conversational break ,suggest mediation"
  • Sections removed:
  • Discussion of recent additions
Archive link for 2009-07-25T18:29:57Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Discussion of recent additions */ split"
  • Sections removed:
  • Discussion of recent additions
Archive link for 2009-07-25T18:31:54Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Perhaps Citizendium could help? */ link Citizendium"
  • Sections removed:
  • Perhaps Citizendium could help?
Archive link for 2009-07-25T18:56:00Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "tweaking the top business... archiving two conversations, no comments since july 16th."
  • Sections removed:
  • All 10 images
  • RFC: Should the potential for harm to result inform our editorial decisions regarding encyclopedic content?
  • New arguments go here
  • Image of Hermann Rorschach
  • Proposed policy by Danglingdiagnosis
  • Completely unrelated, but...
  • A Consideration on Harm, Protection of Test Materials, and the Use of the Images in Question
  • Comments from a designated representative
  • A compromise informing the reader about health concerns.
Archive link for 2009-07-25T20:05:53Z (diff)
  • Formal mediation?

2009-07-28[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-28T12:47:26Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* =Formal mediation declined */ fix arb break header"
  • Sections removed:
  • Formal mediation declined

2009-07-29[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-29T02:15:02Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:70.231.247.220
  • Summary: "/* Interesting piece from the NYTs */ NYTs -> NYT"
  • Sections removed:
  • Interesting piece from the NYTs
Archive link for 2009-07-29T03:23:05Z (diff)
  • Circular Links

2009-07-30[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-30T02:49:15Z (diff)
  • I hope
Archive link for 2009-07-30T14:19:25Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "archiving mostly no comments since july 25"
  • Sections removed:
  • Another kind of damage
  • Clarification About the Rules of this Debate
  • General agreement to move the inkblot debate to a subpage
  • plagiarism?
Archive link for 2009-07-30T14:29:12Z (diff)
  • An ER Doctor is not a Pyschologist
Archive link for 2009-07-30T18:14:31Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Ward3001
  • Summary: "/* thx!!!!!!!! */ removed garbage per WP:TALK"
  • Sections removed:
  • thx!!!!!!!!
Archive link for 2009-07-30T22:14:16Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:LjL
  • Summary: "None"
  • Sections removed:
  • Recently moved image discussions
Archive link for 2009-07-30T23:53:40Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:LjL
  • Summary: "None"
  • Sections removed:
  • All 10 images

2009-07-31[edit]

Archive link for 2009-07-31T01:09:27Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Recently moved image discussions */ trim"
  • Sections removed:
  • RFC: Should the potential for harm to result inform our editorial decisions regarding encyclopedic content?
  • New arguments go here
  • A Consideration on Harm, Protection of Test Materials, and the Use of the Images in Question
  • A compromise informing the reader about health concerns.
  • Comments from a designated representative
Archive link for 2009-07-31T01:17:02Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "archiving, no comments since 25 july"
  • Sections removed:
  • More misinformation
  • Archiving unhelpful sections?
  • On ethical concerns
  • Discussion of recent additions
Archive link for 2009-07-31T01:17:47Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "chrono move"
  • Sections removed:
  • Utterly cool-headed correction
Archive link for 2009-07-31T01:28:11Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "i think this is about over"
  • Sections removed:
  • Formal mediation filed
  • Formal mediation declined
Archive link for 2009-07-31T01:29:43Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "moving stale section (no pun intended), leaving subsection behind as new L2 as non-image related"
  • Sections removed:
  • Stale
  • Improving the criticism section
Archive link for 2009-07-31T19:03:14Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "chrono move"
  • Sections removed:
  • But I studied the test! Why did I fail?
Archive link for 2009-07-31T20:14:14Z (diff)
  • I'm a nigger

2009-08-03[edit]

Archive link for 2009-08-03T19:20:51Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Jmh649
  • Summary: "/* Inclusion of inkblots in article in other languages */"
  • Sections removed:
  • Inclusion of inkblots in article in other languages
Archive link for 2009-08-03T22:26:37Z (diff)
  • Hide the associations?
Archive link for 2009-08-03T23:37:46Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:86.159.191.14
  • Summary: "←Replaced content with 'get a life, losers'"
  • Sections removed:
  • Recently moved image discussions
  • Recently archived discussions
  • Interesting piece from the NYT
  • Improving the criticism section
  • Social impact
  • Circular Links
  • no such word as administrating
  • An ER Doctor is not a Pyschologist
  • Self reference
  • Irrevocable Harm to Authors/Dangerous Precedent
  • Usage
  • Results citations
  • Publicity etc
  • The scholar papers challenging it.
  • Infligment
  • Utterly cool-headed correction
  • Use in court
  • What happened to my comment?
  • The world supports the addition of these images (reason number 7 I think)
  • But I studied the test! Why did I fail?
  • multiple similar examples exist in medical field
  • Professional complaints will occur
  • Stray copyright arguments
  • Hide the associations?

2009-08-06[edit]

Archive link for 2009-08-06T00:33:02Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Chillum
  • Summary: "please revert me if I am wrong, but this seems to be a thread of its own, not a subthread"
  • Sections removed:
  • Further comments
Archive link for 2009-08-06T17:31:27Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:SlimVirgin
  • Summary: "removing personalized commentary"
  • Sections removed:
  • Doctor is held to higher standard
Archive link for 2009-08-06T21:12:35Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "369kb so I must do some trimming, archiving some conversations and move one to image subpage"
  • Sections removed:
  • Interesting piece from the NYT
  • Improving the criticism section
  • Social impact
  • Circular Links
  • no such word as administrating
  • An ER Doctor is not a Pyschologist
  • Self reference
  • Irrevocable Harm to Authors/Dangerous Precedent

2009-08-07[edit]

Archive link for 2009-08-07T12:54:02Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "/* Images */ better header"
  • Sections removed:
  • Images

2009-08-08[edit]

Archive link for 2009-08-08T06:52:44Z (diff)
  • Recently moved image discussions
  • Recently archived discussions
  • Usage
  • Results citations
  • Publicity etc
  • The scholar papers challenging it.
  • Infligment
  • Utterly cool-headed correction
  • What happened to my comment?
  • The world supports the addition of these images (reason number 7 I think)
  • multiple similar examples exist in medical field
  • Hide the associations?
  • Appreciating Conflicting Ethics
  • Availability
  • Differing philosophies
  • Further comments
  • Page protection
  • Conclusions?
  • Edit filter to prevent image removal
  • Couple of points
  • Two world views

2009-08-10[edit]

Archive link for 2009-08-10T06:56:44Z (diff)
  • Use in court
  • But I studied the test! Why did I fail?
  • Hide the associations?
  • The reflist template
  • Mex-psych's comments

2009-08-11[edit]

Archive link for 2009-08-11T07:04:01Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Hroðulf
  • Summary: "changed headings /* Prior exposure */ replied"
  • Sections removed:
  • The basic question is
Archive link for 2009-08-11T16:16:50Z (diff)
  • Removed by: User:Xeno
  • Summary: "miszabot is handling archiving now, this won't be kept u-t-d"
  • Sections removed:
  • Recently moved image discussions
  • Recently archived discussions

2009-08-12[edit]

Archive link for 2009-08-12T07:08:53Z (diff)
  • Method
  • The world supports the addition of these images (reason number 7 I think)
  • multiple similar examples exist in medical field
  • Differing philosophies
  • Page protection
  • Copyright
  • Attitudes
  • Prior exposure
  • New policy
  • The questions/issues
Archive link for 2009-08-12T21:50:03Z (diff)
  • Verbal's comments

2009-08-13[edit]

Archive link for 2009-08-13T07:09:49Z (diff)
  • Utterly cool-headed correction
  • Additional Perspective - Hope to Move Forward
  • Where are the goalposts?
  • Conclusions?
  • Another suggestion for compromise
  • Edit filter to prevent image removal
  • Another compromise section
  • Cultural differences
  • RfC posted

2009-08-14[edit]

Archive link for 2009-08-14T07:07:40Z (diff)
  • Two world views
  • Card size

2009-08-16[edit]

Archive link for 2009-08-16T07:08:25Z (diff)
  • Professional complaints will occur
  • Stray copyright arguments
  • Further comments
  • Staying on topic
  • Interesting piece on the Rorschach by a psychologist

2009-08-17[edit]

Archive link for 2009-08-17T07:19:03Z (diff)
  • Method
  • Availability
  • Couple of points


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rorschach_test/Index_of_archives&oldid=1137163653"