User talk:CorbieVreccan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Veteran Editor II
This editor is a Grand Tutnum and is entitled to display this Book of Knowledge with Coffee Cup Stain.
Partially Cloudy


I WISH I COULD RETIRE


This user wishes that they could leave Wikipedia, but doesn't seem able to do so...
RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 15:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

UnderwoodKeyboard.jpg This user is old enough to remember what a typewriter is, and that's all you need to know.
Mulher com cesto e couves.jpg Everyone has points of view with inherent cultural biases - recognition is the first step to achieving NPOV.


CAGrave.jpg This user knows too many people who are dead.
Centralized discussion
Proposals: policy other Discussions Ideas

For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

Note: entries for inactive discussions, closed or not, should be moved to the archive.

The Signpost
6 September 2016


If you are new here, and feeling angry, please read Tips for the Angry New User before explaining to us how terribly wrong and messed up Wikipedia is. Would you believe, we probably already know? You can also familiarise yourself with Wikipedia culture via these policy links ->
and helpful essays ^^^

If you've been an admin for a while, and are feeling burnt out, take a step back and take some deep breaths, and don't forget to WP:CHILL

What's goin' on...[edit]

Sweat Lodge WP Tag[edit]

Hi :) I saw you removed the WP Altered States of Consciousness Banner from the Sweat Lodge article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sweat_lodge Our scope includes methods of inducing altered states of consciousness and for example this research paper points to sweat lodges being effective in inducing those, therefore I added it. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20558090 Meerpirat (talk) 15:12, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

It's not the purpose of the ceremony. It's a religious ceremony. Are you adding the tag to other religious ceremonies? The very phrasing of abstract shows a lack of basic familarity with the topic. The source is not WP:RS for the Indigenous cultures in question. - CorbieV 15:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
We do have other religious ceremonies tagged, for example the ayahuasca ceremony, as they also result in altered states of consciousness. I think I didn't explain this clearly, our focus is not what the ceremony is for, but about the psychological consequences of the ceremony.

Meerpirat (talk) 13:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

And the reasons there are the same; you are taking a piece of a religious rite out of context and reinterpreting it. Unless you're also putting the ecstatic states reached by prayer, fasting and singing, etc in mainstream religions in that category, it's not really appropriate. It singles those religions out as somehow "exotic" to westerners and products for consumption rather than part of the cultural fabric in which they exist. - CorbieV 17:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Ah okay, you are absolutely right, we also should include other practices from other religions that induce altered states. I don't know why so far especially Buddhist and from the Western viewpoint more "exotic" practices received special attention in the research we have found, but if you have Wiki-worthy reports of altered states in for example Christian prayer, we'd be glad to have it and add it to our project. Meerpirat (talk) 15:18, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@Meerpirat: with this edit summary:[1] you misrepresented our discussion here, as well as your edits. I do not see you putting the "altered states project" thing on articles about Western religions. The same issues I brought up above with this still stand. As far as I can see, nothing has changed. Are you consciously misrepresenting this situation or did you just misunderstand? I have also pinged the Indigenous wikiproject members about this. - CorbieV 01:24, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Help with Dignity picture[edit]

You had posted a nice message to me about the photograph I posted of the Dignity (statue). In that, you said I needed to demonstrate that I have the relevant permissions. I actually think I do have the permissions, I just don't know how to submit them or attach them to the file. In the meantime, the photograph was tagged for "speedy deletion," and although the tag said I could contest it and get the permissions, the deletion occurred only about 90 minutes later - I wasn't even home during the interval.

I am hoping you can tell me what I need to submit so I can reupload the photograph, this time with the necessary tag to avoid all of this trouble. There are all sorts of pictures like this on Wikipedia so there must be a way to do it. Thanks much. Otis1000 (talk) 01:14, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

OK, when you go to upload it it's going to ask you some questions about whether it's your own work, or who took the photo, and what the licensing is. Fill all of those in to the best of your ability. There is no deadline. If you're not sure if you did it right, mention that in an edit summary or on the talk page. Just do your best with it. Once you've done that bit, let me know and I'll take a look. In the meantime, I'll put the other photo back in. That one has also been flagged. You said that one is your own work. If you took that photo that one should be fine to use for now. - CorbieV 02:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection[edit]

Padlock-blue.svg Hello, CorbieVreccan. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons[edit]

Lady Elizabeth Wilbraham by Sir Peter Lely.jpg
Anne Stine Moe Ingstad (1918-1997).jpg


October 2016

Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons
Faciliated by Women in Red

Women in Red logo.svg

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging