User talk:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

August 2013[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Scray. I wanted to let you know that your recent contributions to Talk:Morgellons have been reverted or removed because they could be seen to be defamatory or libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. In this edit you described a living person as "mentally ill". Scray (talk) 21:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.


The new data in "Credit score in U.S." introduced on November 15, 2013 that you erased is true. Source: FICO website. Thanks, Cgx8253. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:03, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Do you know the four generations of FICO scores (generic and industry options only) in years 1995, 1998, 2004, and 2008?. The 1995 version already is not used by lenders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:45, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Comments 2[edit]

I understand, but I erased my update and you wrote it again. I am sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:39, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

What is the problem?[edit]

TV shows that are real and exist are not and cannot be fictional anythings. Fictional categories are for things that do not exist in reality. What about this is confusing? Jerry Pepsi (talk) 06:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

The categories are appropriate to apply to works about the fictional things, just as categories about non-fictional things (for example, economics) are appropriate to apply to works about them. (talk) 06:13, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Um. no. Categories for fictional things are for articles that are about fictional things. Real thing are never appropriately categorized as fictional. "Fictional" means they don't exist. Things that exist can never be things that don't exist. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 06:19, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but you have a unique vision for Wikipedia's use of categories that isn't shared by your fellow editors. Once again, please seek consensus before making these changes. (talk) 06:22, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Not classifying things that don't exist as things that do exist is not unconventional. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 06:28, 7 February 2014 (UTC)


Let me know your opinion on this article, I believe it should be redirected to parapsychology. Goblin Face (talk) 17:14, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't think I have a strong opinion either way. Psionics, as I understand it, more commonly refers to mental powers in works in the fantasy, sci-fi, and superhero genres than "real" parapsychology. Throwing cars as opposed to bending spoons or mind control as opposed to reading "surface thoughts". However, the psionics article as written doesn't reflect my understanding of the term and appears to focus more on "real-world" applications. (talk) 18:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)