User talk:Peter G Werner/2005–2006

Welcome!

Hello, Peter G Werner/2005–2006, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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:Where to ask a question, 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!  --Heah (talk) 05:34, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

psilocybes

hi-

i think that you going through the psilocybe articles would be excellent. I just got this project going, and then it was finals time at school and this saturday i'm leaving for ecuador and won't be back until july, so not much has been done with it other than some preliminary categorization and whatnot. Having people who actually know what they are talking about working on this would be wonderful; as you say, your area of expertise is none to common. Most of what i can contribute to the project is not scientific information, but rather anthropological etc, and help is sorely needed.

I think your idea about the list of psilocybes as a seperate article is excellent. you should post some of this on the project talk page.

thanks! --Heah (talk) 02:16, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Saprophyte

Some time ago you changed the article Saprotroph and added the following paragraph :

"Saprophyte is an older term that is now considered obsolete. The suffix -phyte means "plant", however, there are no truly saprotrophic organisms that are embryophytes, and fungi and bacteria are no longer placed in the Plant Kingdom. Plants that were once considered saprophytes, such as non-photosynthetic orchids and monotropes, are now known to be parasites on other plants. "

A discussion has now arisen on Talk:Orchidaceae about saprophytes. I've changed the wording in the article (General description) to parasite, but I'm not happy with this. Obviously the term 'saprophyte' is still very much in use on the internet (even on university sites), while I cannot find any substantiation of your claim that the term has become obsolete. Maybe it's a new trend in botany that I'm not aware of. Anyway, could you give some more information on this matter ? (if possible with references ?). JoJan 08:08, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for the belated reply, but I don't check my user talk on a regular basis, so I didn't see your question until now. Anyway, I stand by what I wrote, in the strongest terms - "saprophyte" is an obsolete term - it specifically means a plant that is a decomposer. In biology, we now know that there are no green plants that are decomposers. The various plant groups, such as achlorophyllous monotropes and orchids, that were once referred to as "saprophytes" and thought to be decomposers are now known to be epiparasites upon the plants and fungi engaged in an ectomycorrhizal relationship. Achlorophyllous orchids should therefore be referred to as "myco-heterotrophs" or "epiparasites", but not "saprophytes".

References - you might want to start with Taylor and Bruns (1997), which can be found here: [1]. I don't have the references handy, but I could also point you to some recent stable isotope studies showing a clear flow from ectomycorrhizal carbon to the orchid.

I also take issue with your method of finding that the term "saprophyte" is still a current term. You did what, a Google search? Give me a break! You can always find any number of people using any number of obsolete terms. It does not mean those terms or concepts are in any way scientifically current.

--Peter G Werner 04:48, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Copwatch vote and mycology

Hi Peter. It seems like you and I have quite a bit in common. I stumbled upon your user page because of your vote to keep Copwatch (thanks!), and found out that you are a fellow mycologist. I am also interested in getting a Mycology Project going, but I don't put a great deal of time and effort into WP these days. My main interests are the Glomeromycota and mycorrhizae, which need a whole lot of work. I am also interested in working on groups of which I know very little because it's a good way to learn some new taxa! Mycota 07:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, I've just started a Wikiproject on Fungi, at least on "paper". How to get it off the ground I'm less sure of. Perhaps I'll post a notice soon on the Mycological Society of SF listserv, which might bring out some interested folks. On the subject of mycorrhiza - have you seen the arbuscular mycorrhizas page lately? It looks very good - the person who contributed most of the material, Msturmel, is not a regular Wikipedia contributor, but using the name and IP address listed on the history page, I'm quite sure the contributor was Marie-Soleil Turmel of University of Manitoba. Perhaps she might be interested in contributing more. I like your idea of working on taxa one doesn't know much about as a way of working on them. I've been meaning to learn more about the Kickxellales, Zoopagales, and Blastocladales, as these form a newly delineated basal clade in the fungi, but their groups I don't know the first thing about - maybe I'll read up on these and contribute some articles. Peter G Werner 09:15, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Pileipellis

Hi Peter, the article Pileipellis is currently a speedy deletion candidate because it does not have any content. Did you mean to add more? —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-04-05 06:51Z

Yes I did, and I removed the speedy deletion tag. I was creating article with only external links as a kind of placeholder (attempting to fill some redlinks), but I see that isn't considered kosher. Peter G Werner 06:59, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Personally I think it's fine to use external links as a placeholder. The speedy deletion rule is mainly intended for combatting spam and such. The only problem with waiting too long after creating it is other people think you forgot about it. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-04-05 07:25Z

Galerina

My compliments for your work to the Galerina article. Very nice piece of work as far as I can tell, and one of the best worked out mushroom articles I've come across in the Wikpedia. One thing that could improve the article still would be an image gallery of the frequent species, please upload if you have any pics, or bring camera next time you go hunting. Keep up the good work :-) Jens Nielsen 20:39, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

There are plenty of images out on the web, but I'm mindful of copyright issues, so my usual strategy is simply to provide links to articles with illustrations. I am a mushroom photographer, but I tend to concentrate on Psilocybe, since that's what I'm working on. I'll try and make a point of snapping some Galerina pics, but I don expect to encounter any until the late spring Sierra Nevada mushroom season. Plus Galerina is a hugely diverse genus that's notoriously difficult to identify to species - Galerina marginata is the only one of these that I would call even remotely "common". Peter G Werner 22:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm anxiously awaiting the mushroom season so I can get to add some pictures. At this time, there is mostly only polypores. If you do have your own photo's why not go ahead and upload a bunch to the Commons? If you add the species names, I could try to fit them into the appropriate wikipedia articles. I find that mushroom articles are worth so little without pictures. An image gallery to show the range of variability would be even better. Have a look at the Trametes versicolor article to see what I mean. Jens Nielsen 08:40, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Another thing User:Debivort has made an excellent mushroom morpology chart and an mycomorphbox template that I'd recommend referring to in mushroom articles describing morphology. And if you do have your own pictures - do you have a better one of Psilocybe cubensis? As I wrote on its talk page, I think we should have a better one. Jens Nielsen 08:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The thing with my better Psilocybe images is that I license some of them commercially, so I tend to want to have those available for sale and not have them floating around the net. Also, I don't have any pictures of Psilocybe cubensis. I suppose I could upload a few that are less likely to have commercial value, but I'd rather hold on to the copyright on my best images.

As for the mushroom morphology chart, there was one for Galerina - it was way too narrow, and didn't come close to describing the range of characters commonly seen in this genus. I tried expanding it, but that didn't work, so I finally ended up getting rid of it. Most notably, I couldn't input anything for spore color, other than "brown" - that's really bad, because there are a huge number of mushroom spore colors in the "brown" range, and the differences between these colors make a real difference in identification. Peter G Werner 21:56, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Are we talking about the same thing? The first I was talking about was the Mushroom cap morphology illustration [2] which you might not be aware of. The template I think you were talking about, Template:Mycomorphbox does indeed have some limitations, but it can be improved upon, please take the time to discuss it with Debivort if you have not done so, I'm sure he's willing to work at it. I like the idea of having a more or less fixed template for describing each species - much as every mushroom handbook has it, where you can get the most important characteristics at a glance. As for your images - pity for Wikipedia, but please consider contributing whatever you can spare :-) Jens Nielsen 11:35, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it was the Mycomorphbox template I was talking about - I think its a good idea, actually, its just that its not terribly useful in its present form. If a mushroom has a range of characteristics (which is frequently the case, especially when we're talking about an entire genus), there's no way (as far as I know) to enter more than one characteristic. I'm simply not knowledgeable enough in template construction to fix that limitation - I'd do so if I could. I'll go over some of my images and try to spare a few for Wikipedia. Peter G Werner 01:43, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi! I didn't realize this conversation was going on, otherwise I would have chimed in. The mycomorphbox template can be easily expanded to include color variations or other feature characteristics I didn't include on the first pass. Also, you are right to remove it when it can't encompass the full diversity of a group. It is probably appropriate to include it on species pages, where features will be less variable, than on genus pages where they change between species. Debivort 17:37, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

CYTOCHALASIN B CLEANUP

you requested CYTOCHALASIN B CLEANUP. Can you be specific what do you expect? AbuAmir 18:43, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the state of the Cytochalasin B article, to begin with, I think the article needs to be written in better English. I suppose I can help with that as I find time to do rewrites. It should also follow Wikipedia conventions on citing sources. More generally, it should follow the overall style of Wikipedia articles on chemical compounds and have a Chembox - see Hydrazine for a good example. The Aflatoxin article is also good, though it too should have a Chembox. Peter G Werner 21:19, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Harry's Place

I've responded on my talk page. If you want to use the text of the deleted page to rebuild it, then just ask as I am an admin and can view the text of deleted pages. David | Talk 13:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I've recreated the last version of the deleted page and put it at User:Peter G Werner/Harry's Place. David | Talk 17:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Peter G Werner 17:48, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I've "gone live" with the page and have saved a backup copy at User:Peter G Werner/Harry's Place (saved). Peter G Werner 20:25, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Ambient Music

Hello, thank you for re-editing my sentences, I am aware that my English is not perfect. Please note that a few drone sounds that can be heard in "A Saucerful of Secrets" and "More" by Pink Floyd have connections with Ambient music. Anyway, within next weeks I am going to contact WK administrators and a few University experts regarding all these Electronic and ambient music related articles that are here. I understand that for young people below 25, Ambient is one of the music genres that can be listened in nightclubs, but I can ensure that it is not semantically correct. Ambient is mainly Brian Eno, Cluster and their followers in the New Age stream. Slang and young people ideologies are not suitable for encyclopedias. skysurfer 17:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I've moved this discussion here

Harry's Place

Take it to Speedy deletions. The unilateral (or rather, clearly bilateral) recreation of this article is contrary to the instructions at Wikipedia:Deletion review regarding articles which have had 2 AFD knock-backs. --Mais oui! 23:36, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

There is no consensus on how to review an article that has been improperly deleted, hence I recreated the article. I am perfectly willing to go through the review process, however, I thing that speedy deletion without any means of reviewing the decision is simply an exercise in bad faith on your part. Peter G Werner 23:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

And you can keep your "bad faith" allegations to yourself. Bye bye. --Mais oui! 23:47, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Ambient Music

On what basis are you re-adding Richard Bone's name to the list of "Notable musicians" in ambient music? I've heard of Richard Bone and know he's an ambient musician with some recording output, but notable and important? I can think of many artists who are better known or more historically important in that genre who aren't on that list. The reason I removed RB and several other artists is that the list was becoming bloated with too many "somebody's favorite ambient musician" with no regard of their importance in the overall genre. Also, if I'm not mistaken, you're webmaster for Richard Bone's website, so you may be a bit close to the person in question to have perspective on this. Peter G Werner 03:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Please forgive my contribution to the ‘notable musicians’ section Mr. Werner. I have no doubt you are an expert on ambient music and who should or should not be included. I had no idea maintaining a website for an artist made one a less valuable contributor. Even though Richard Bone has been creating ambient & electronic music for 15 years and considered by many reliable sources to be one of the most significant ambient musicians in the US, I have/will deleted my contributions. Marleen 00:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I have re-added Richard Bone's two most notable ambient recordings as per the discussion here. Marleen 22:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Heavy metal in Islamic countries

Please read the arguments to understand the problem of the article, it is a POV, most of the countries have their own music or rock pages, such as Rock and alternative music in Iran where such information can be merged in to, the move to have these music and these countries categorized as "Islamic" is wrong, as I have put in the nomination, its like having "Folk music in Christrian countries", it is just not right. Please feel free to modify your vote and if you don't agree then nevermind -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 19:53, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm letting my vote stand. I do note the problems with the concept of the "Islamic world", which of course, is very diverse and regionally vast. However, in a very loose sense, its a useable concept along the lines of "Western world" (a term I prefer to "Christian world"). I strongly suspect that the growth of black metal scenes, and official reactions to them, is a similar social phenomena in Iran, Pakistan, and Malaysia, and yes, I know Malaysia and Iran are very different cultures with very different history. Perhaps propose retitling the article if you find it so objectionable? Peter G Werner 20:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

You see my problem is with the "Islamic world" and all that. Sure, in Iran we see the west as "West". But Iran has been an Islamic state only for the last 27 or so years from its 3000 years history. So that is why I see it as a problem. The whole Black metal scene in these countries are against Islam (surprise, surprise!) and against their "Islamic" regime, so to even categorize their music as "Heavy metal in Islamic countries", is offensive to them.. -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 10:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Castoriadis translation?

Coincidentally, I was looking at the French page just a few minutes before you put up your request! On a quick skim, I wasn't seeing anything too exciting there (aside perhaps from his involvement in psychoanalytic orgs should possibly be represented in the English article) but will have another look. AllyD 19:08, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, the French page is a good deal longer, so I assumed coverage was more thorough. However, since I can't actually read French (though one of my many goals is to someday learn how), I can't actually tell how good the article is. Peter G Werner 21:08, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

To link a new page into the translation page, proceed something like this

• Create a subject heading for the page, consisting fo the referring link without the surrounding []'s so that [[Voltaire]] becomes :fr:Voltaire. Note that [[fr:Voltaire]] creates an extralinear link on the left to the FR wikipedia and that [[:fr:Voltaire]] is therefore necessary for an interlinear link
• Copy in the template and fill in the information as known</nowiki> Modus Vivendi 09:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry – I have no idea what you're asking me to do here. Peter G Werner 18:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Amcbride asked how to format an article translation request on the Project page. For some reason, I posted this information to your Talk page instead. Modus Vivendi 20:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Page Blanking

On 6-May, you blanked Harakat-i Inqilab-i Islami. Blanking pages is generally considered a bad idea. I've reverted it to the previous version. If this was the result of a broken edit, you may wish to make the correct edits. If you believe the redirect should be deleted, please follow the redirect portion of the deletion procedures. If you believe an article should be written instead of the redirect, please write a stub. If you have questions, please let me know. Thanks! -- JLaTondre 01:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Kommune 1

Hi Peter! I love the work you have done proofing the Kommune 1 article, it shows that you have a much better command of the English language than I do (BTW: Ich glaube, wir könnten uns auch auf deutsch unterhalten, nicht wahr?). Please be careful with corrections, however. German "Pudding" does not - at least for speakers of British English - translate into English "pudding" (which for them is a rich, fruity, Christmas-y kind of thing, or something completely different, like Yorkshire pudding) but into custard (I see I still had one instance of pudding in my version, too). Custard-throwing also has some tradition in cartoons and comedies, so I'm changing this back. Keep up the good work! --Groogokk 07:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I can't really speak German, unfortunately – I've taken about a year of reading German in college and can translate (slowly) with the aid of a dictionary.

As for "pudding" - it actually means a couple of different things in English, and differs somewhat between British English and American English. In British English, "pudding" usually means a steamed cake, along the lines of a Christmas pudding, and also blood sausages, like Yorkshire pudding. In the US, "pudding" usually means a cornstarch pudding along the lines of "Jello pudding", which based on my viewing of the German article on pudding, seems to be used in the same sense in German. Americans refer to British-style puddings as "steamed pudding", and there is also "bread pudding", made with custard and old bread. (I make an excellent steamed pudding with candy-cap mushrooms and persimmons, BTW) Custard in English refers to various egg-based sweets, such as the soft custards that would fill a donut or eclair, or a firm custard desert, such as a creme caramel or creme brulee.

Anyway, if the "Kommune 1" were planning on throwing a kind of cornstarch pudding at Hubert Humphrey, the best translation would be "pudding". Peter G Werner 08:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I forgot to mention, I also requested a translation of de:Uschi Obermaier. If you have time to translate that too, that would be great. In any event, thanks again for all of your work on the "Kommune 1" translation. Peter G Werner 08:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your appreciation, and I'll leave the pudding-custard decision to you native English speakers. I just remembered that during my stay in Britain, people emphasized that the yellow dessert that is produced with boiling milk and, nowadays, some kind of ready-made powder (consisting of starch, sugar, and other ingredients, like the German Pudding) is custard. I've eaten bread and butter pudding, Christmas pudding and the Yorkshire variety, and I agreed that they were very different from the German thing. I did not get to eat pudding in the States, though.

I'd love to do the article on Obermaier as well, especially if I can count on you proofing that one as well!

The article on Kommune 1 does not look like a stub to me anymore; I'm wondering if we can remove that tag. --Groogokk 08:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

You're right about removing the stub tag - I just did so. I'd be happy to proof a translated Uschi Obermaier article. Peter G Werner 10:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Here you are: Uschi Obermaier ;-) --Groogokk 11:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Reverting on Entheogen

Since anyone who in purported earnest contributes on the Wikipedia should be treated as a benign entity (see Wikipedia:Assume good faith), I reverted your reversion. It's hard for me with my background to see if there might be something worth keeping in that edit. But one thing was quite clear to me. It was not a case of vandalism. __meco 12:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

WHAT?

Why would you delete useful and relevent information from the psilocybe page? Who is the vandal, the one trying to get the facts straight or the one continuing the delusions imposed by Roman oppression? It is obvious that you need a lot of work in your understanding of where we are at this very moment in history. You clearly do not have any understanding of how vital and iminent the knowlede of this information truly is. Everything that was added by my post took my time my energy and was highly informative and useful, therefor I do not take kindly to YOUR ACT OF VANDALISM. If you have something useful to add to or correct feel free to do so, but you simply cannot massively delete information. That is not only VANDALISM but it is REPRESSION and OPPRESSION.

I recomend that you pray my friend because there is a curse on the head of you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.47.96.106 (talk • contribs) 21:27, 19 May 2006

I'll note that threats, even the magical/mystical kind, can be considered harassment and is not considered civil behavior on Wikipedia.

Quite simply, your edits speak for themselves. Besides being decidedly eccentric, they are POV and constitute original research. Some of your more random edits (such as "Milk for babes, meat for men.") border on vandalism. I reverted them for good reason.

I'll also note that you have a long history of destructive edits to "Psilocybe" and other articles on entheogens.

On a more positive note, after seeing your edits, I did incorporated material on the Tassili n'Ajjer rock paintings into the Psilocybe article. Peter G Werner 04:13, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

This matter could have be handled differently by the both of you. As for the anonymous poster, I agree with Peter G Werner that what you write appears distinctly eccentric. That said, I find your contribution intriguing and I would like for others too to be able to digest it and maybe something could be developed out of it that could end up on the article page. I strongly recommend that you take time to collate your facts and critically formulate them and then post this to the Talk Page instead of the main page. In this way a consensus might be reached on how to present your material. And, keep in mind what has also been mentioned here above that all arguments presented must be accompanied by cited source information, as it would otherwise be seen as original research, and that is by policy disallowed here. __meco 08:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe the anonymous poster to be User:Mannaseejah. He focuses mostly on the Manna article, making similar highly eccentric edits that are soon reverted. Basically, he has some oddball theory that Psilocybe was actually the Biblical "Manna", that Christianity originally was a psychedelic religion, but that original message was subverted by Roman authorities, that the authority of Rome still lives on, and that he's part of a Melchizedek priesthood that preserves the original psychedelic truth. This is accompanied by an unhealthy paranoia and delusions of grandeur that he's somehow being persecuted for trying to spread the truth. Here's a history of the various (usually anonymous) manifestations of this user:

Mannaseejah (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

216.190.22.190 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

208.47.99.199 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

208.47.98.133 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

208.47.96.106 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

136.245.4.252 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

64.113.110.111 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

If you care to go over the "contributions" of this user, you'll see that they're pretty much one-note, eccentric, and unencyclopedic rants sometimes accompanied by blatant vandalism (such as page blanking or "I dare you to delete this" statements on the article page). You'll also see that others deal with this user pretty much the way I have, by reverting them. I just don't see, Meco, why the burden should be be upon me and other well-meaning users to creatively incorporate the rants of someone like Mannaseejah into an article. Peter G Werner 16:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

As for the last sentence, I would agree wholeheartedly with you. No such obligation should exist. If someone chooses to do so it ought to arise from that someone wishing to do it. I appreciate you bringing light on the issue that to me wasn't there before. However, as for any suggestion that what he is adding is completely without warrant (albeit erratically presented), I will note that information about the Allegro book already incorporated on the Entheogen page seems to run along more or less the same track. __meco 08:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, his oddball mixture of psychedelic evangelism, anti-Roman Christianity, and outright paranoia and hostility bear an uncanny resemblance to Philip K Dick at the depths of his mental illness. [3] The essential difference being that PKD could actually write a coherent sentence.

Look, if Mannaseejah actually wants to carry out some scholarship, however odd, that's actually based on a source other than his supposed communication with God, is coherently written, and doesn't overwrite well-researched and well-written content, he's welcome to. But if he's going to act like an archetypal Lone Nut ranting against the world, he's pretty much going to be treated as such. Peter G Werner 13:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Parasite merger

I was opposed to merging the parasite and parasitism articles, but now that you have done it I'm starting to like the result. Are you sure no information was lost? It seems that the talk page of "parasite" has disappeared though. Don't you think it should be copied and pasted in the list of parasitic organisms talk? Thanks. IronChris | (talk) 03:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I copied the entire talk page to the Talk:Parasitism talk page, so no worries there. I was also careful not to lose information from the article itself in the process of merging. Thanks for the compliment about the state of the article - I figured I could merge the article in a way that improved the resulting information. Peter G Werner 03:47, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey Peter, great job you're doing on the article ! →ΣcoPhreek_Δ 21:01, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

The word "Islamophobia"

Greetings, I couldn't help but appreciate your extremely accurate comments relative to User:Raphael1 on the countering systemic bias talk page. You also mentioned his use of the word "islamophobic" and how loaded that term is. Due to this last part I thought that you might want to be aware of this related discussion concering a category using that word. Thanks. Netscott 08:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I don't actually support removal of the Islamophobia article - the term is in widespread use and highly controversial, hence it easily meets the criterion for notability. However the article definitely needs to be cleaned up to meet the NPOV and NOR criteria expected of Wikipedia articles. I'm not sure how I feel one way or the other about "Category:Islamophobia". It seems like a rather minor thing to be arguing over, much less calling for deletion. On the other hand, I could see how such a category could be abused for POV purposes, such as putting articles like "Harry's Place" or "Peter Tatchell" in that category, effectively using a category classification to brand someone as "racist". Such abuses could be easily reverted, however. Peter G Werner 15:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Galerina

Moved discussion to Talk:Galerina – discussion probably should have taken place there to begin with.

What Really Happened AfD

Hello - I believe you were trying to do some cleanup to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/What Really Happened when you errantly removed at least one legitimate comment (my own). I have reverted your edit in the interest of caution. Feel free to now redo whatever cleanup you had intended for the article. Cheers --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 20:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry! Don't know how that happened. Perhaps we were trying to both edit at the same time. Peter G Werner 20:34, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

No worries, I can tell from your other edits that you're not one of "the flood" that are trolling that AfD. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 20:42, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, my referral to "What Really Happened" AfD came from an anonymous user (the same person who's entry I was cleaning up the format of) on the Talk:Harry's Place page denouncing me for the fact that there's a Harry's Place page, but What Really Happened is up for deletion. As if I had anything to do with the latter. I'm reserving judgment on the notability of What Really Happened until I learn more about it. Peter G Werner 20:51, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Social Democrats USA

You recently disputed the neutrality of Social Democrats USA. It would be helpful if you could summarize your objections on the article's Talk page so they could be addressed. -David Schaich 00:10, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Interesting - I could have sworn that I left a message on the talk page right after I posted the tag, but the history for that page reveals that I didn't. I must have pressed the wrong button or something. Anyway, I'll go there now and discuss what I see as the problems with the article. Peter G Werner 00:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Hymenochaetales link

Hi, I only linked some articles where this definition did user [Borch3kawki]. The definition rely on following publications:

• CHECKLIST OF POLISH LARGER BASIDIOMYCETES W. Wojewoda 2003
• KIRK P. M., CANNON P. F., DAVID J. C. & STALPERS J. C. Ainsworth & Bisby's. Dictionary of the Fungi. 9 ed. CAB International, Biddles Ltd, UK. 2001
• Index Fungorum
• Grzyby i ich oznaczanie B. Gumińska, W. Wojewoda 1985

You can look at the complete definition here [Podstawczaki pieczarkopodobne].

(Response to User talk:Slaweks 3 June 2006 (UTC))

I see. I wasn't aware of Wojewoda's checklist of Polish species – I presume the common names are from there. That makes sense; I know the British Mycological Society has been trying to establish "official" English common names for various fungal taxa, and I believe various other European mycological groups have been trying to do something similar. Peter G Werner 00:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

P. cyanescens cross-section

Yes, the color on this image is not very good. This was one of my first attempts at doing dissected display samples and I had not gotten the lighting right yet. I have since been putting together some better photographic technique and equipment and hope to re-shoot this image and many others agarics this fall. I was really just figuring out how wikipedia worked by putting these images up. I am still very unfamiliar with etiquette on wikipedia so please excuse my faux-passes. I am happy to send you the original image if you would like. How does one do user to user file transfer on wikipedia? Email? Madjack74 15:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry - no faux-pass involved. Anyway, please send me the original image by email. Send it to pgwerner (at) sfsu.edu , replacing the (at) with an @ and removing spaces. (Sorry I can't just give my email address – Wikipedia pages are public and hence liable to address harvesting by spammers.) Once I get the image, I'll do a color correction in Photoshop, and some sharpening and noise-reduction as well (I'm pretty good with Photoshop), then I'll make a smaller image and post it on Wikipedia. Peter G Werner 16:25, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I forgot to add a tip on digital camera use. Its pretty clear what the error was when you took the picture – you used the wrong color balance setting, specifically, you had it set for daylight balance and shot the mushrooms under incandescent light, which is why you have a strong amber cast. The camera should have been set for incandescent or halogen balance or "auto" balance. Daylight and incandescent light are actually two very different colors, but we don't notice that because the visual pathways in our brain automatically adjust for the difference. A digital camera doesn't make this adjustment unless its set to do so. (In the case of film cameras, its a matter of using different kinds of film or adjustment filters.) Peter G Werner 16:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Soil

I am hoping that mycological aspects of this project will interest you. Soil fungi, glomalin and related subjects are pretty important to the encyclopedia-reading public. You are needed. Cheers! -- 67.185.75.97 07:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I've got my hands full with mycological and other organismal/ecological topics, but I appreciate the invitation. I actually had a couple of classes in soil science as an undergrad, but its been many years now, and I haven't kept up on the soil ecology literature since then, I'm afraid. Peter G Werner 07:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

MS Thesis

Have you completed your thesis yet? Is there any possibility that when you do complete it that you might make it available to those of us that would like to enjoy it? Wowbobwow12 01:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm will be completing it by December, in fact, I'm under a deadline to do so. At that point, I'll be putting it together for publication as part of the "Agaricales of California" series, by Mad River Press. Peter G Werner 01:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Well done

		The Original Barnstar
		I hereby award you a Barnstar for your excellent and numerous large-scale article contributions to Wikipedia in the area of mycology. Your dedication in sharing your area of expertise, maintaining neutrality and providing high-quality information is an example to us all. Well done and please keep up the good work -- Serephine / talk - 06:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Why, thank you! Peter G Werner 16:06, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Yvonne Ridley

Good call, it's never something I've had to think about before so it didn't even occur to me. Good call as well on Adeladel's little NPOV addition, I would've missed it. Driller thriller 17:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it's over. Although I've probably spoken too soon. Driller thriller 17:57, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Sex wars

Hey great work on the Feminist Sex Wars article and thanks for turning some of my red links blue! :) ntennis 16:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Its just a stub right now, but I have some good documentation on the 1982 Barnard Conference, so I have a lot that I can eventually incorporate in, as I find time. (Right now I'm busy working on my Masters thesis on a completely unrelated topic, so time spent on Wikipedia is officially goofing off.)
The "Feminist Sex Wars" was an important phase of modern cultural history because it informs so many debates around sexuality today (eg, the umpteenth article in the alternative press taking on the all-important issue of whether SuicideGirls is "empowering" or not), yet many people are not even aware of this earlier debate. Peter G Werner 17:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Covering killer Plant‎

Hello, a new wikipedian has recently written Covering killer Plant‎; I tried to improve a little, and also to contact him/her (no reply), but I'm not an expert on this subject; could you help? bye--skysurfer 20:31, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I promptly listed it for speedy deletion. The article is totally unsalvageable and the entire content of the article is original research on the part of the author concerning an unidentified weed the author has been trying to get rid of. I guarantee you, there is absolutely no plant, invasive or otherwise, with the common name "covering killer plant". Peter G Werner 20:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

As you can realize from the history, I've put a similar tag some minutes ago, but that guy removed it. If he is going to behave in such a way, please consider to contact an administrator and block him/her. I'm busy now and I cannot assist any longer, bye and thx. --skysurfer 20:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

My speedy delete section worked; the article was pulled minutes after I tagged it. (I bet there is actually an article about whatever plant he was dealing with.) Peter G Werner 22:02, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

"Accused" Zionist

I've moved discussion here. Peter G Werner 20:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

WP:No Personal Attacks

I understand that your temper probably just flared up over your disscussions on Radical Feminism with User:Jgda, but please refrain from using personal attacks like these:

"Frankly, you are coming across as a "POV warrior" and "know-nothing critic"."

This will constitute a first warning, but seeing your other work, I'm sure its an isolated event. Easter rising 13:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

umm why second wave removed as not relevant on Melissa Farley?

Moved the comment and my response to Talk:Melissa_Farley. Peter G Werner 18:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Nice guy syndrome

Please do not remove proposed deletion notices from articles as you did to Nice guy syndrome. Not only does this not stop the deletion debate, it is considered vandalism. Please refrain from this in the future. If you wish to join in the debate on whether this article should be deleted, please contribute to the discussion rather than trying to disrupt it. Thanks, Gwernol 21:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't remove that, nor did I make even half of the edits credited to me on the history page. All I did was alter capitalization errors left by 58.105.101.3, which I also did for several other articles. I must have been simultaneously editing with several other users and the history became confused somehow. Weird! Peter G Werner 08:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Um, no, here's the diff from your own contributions list: [4]. I'm afraid I just don't believe the software got it wrong. Someone with access to the password to this account made this change. Either you did or you are sharing this account. Gwernol 11:12, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I saw the contributions list, and its at huge variance with what I remember doing with that article. The changes after line 51/line 38 – those are the changes that I made. Yet it lists all these other edits that I never made alongside the ones I did make. This is one of the weirder things I've ever seen Wikipedia software do. I'm sorry if it inconvenienced you in any way. In the future, I'll double check the contributions list to make sure I've only made the edits I intended on making. Peter G Werner 15:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Islam & WikiProject Countering systemic

Hi - there was a conversation about Islam on WikiProject Countering systemic bias that seemed to stop in May, but without any resolution. I've made a suggestion there, and just thought I'd let you know. --Singkong2005 ^t_c 03:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Fungus improvement

Thanks for the notice about the improvement drive for Fungus. I've been out of the loop for a while, but maybe this will help me get back on track. Mycota 16:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Malvasia

Moved discussion to Talk:Malvasia: Needs sections.

Spaces in fungus

I left a question for you on Talk:Fungus. Regards, Samsara (talk • contribs) 15:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Useful idiot

I see you have marked this article with a {{NPOV}} tag. It would be helpful to discuss what lack of neutrality you see on the talk page; especially since this article has been accused of opposite forms of bias while have substantially identical texts. Septentrionalis 01:31, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

regarding RAWA

I've moved this discussion to Talk:Revolutionary_Association_of_the_Women_of_Afghanistan: Controversies, etc.

Caesarjbsquitti

Just so you know, everything Caesarjbsquitti has added to wiki is original research which aims to tie into his "Half-Truths" article (up for deletion) which in turn aims to direct the reader to squitti's web page. &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149; 13:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

more in re: Melissa Farley

Hi I'm not sure that this article is quite a proper Encyclopedia entry. I know that it's not in the correct format for a serious academic researcher (I went and checked some examples) but she's so busy adding stuff that I can't change it and she's ignored every overture I've put on the articles discussion page as well as greetings I've put on her "my talk" page.

One of the reasons I'm looking for her CV is that usually a person who styles themselves to be "Dr. So-and-so" and trumpets their research about is also usually happy to list their academic credentials, grants, fellowships and other trapping of scholarship. On her there is nothing. And (by accident) I have found that her PhD for instance seems to actually be in Education from a Midwestern teacher's college in 1973, so I'm starting to wonder what isn't being said and why.

Also the person who seems to be so franticly loading it up with laudatory items seems (again I have found by accident via google) to be a least a close colleague if not a friend of the article's subject.

What should be done? Maybe the person is just not used to wikipedia and wiki-etiquette but I'm getting a weird feeling about this. Could I get your opinion please? Thanks CyntWorkStuff 00:39, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

The person doing this is Nikki Craft. She is a close associate of Melissa Farley. The thing is, she hasn't really contributed a biography, just a lot of links and quotes. I'm thinking that its just best to wait until the end of this "roll" and straighten things out afterward. First, the quotes need to go to Wikiquote – that's where they belong rather than Wikipedia. Then probably something about the excessive links afterward. I should point out that Craft is a notorious hardball character – Google "rampage against Penthouse" or "Preying Mantis Women's Brigade" and you'll see what I mean. Peter G Werner 02:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh lord I certainly figured this out now. Look at what she's done with my attempts to introduce myself and start a discussion about this controversial character using (what I hoped might be taken as) a bit of humor to try to deflect wrath.

I actually put all of that on her "mytalk" page to introduce myself and go over some points I saw in the article, as nicely as possible, without putting something to the effect of "not only is the subject of the article a bit of a lunatic but it seems you are too!".

But anyway, I'm really, really sure she's not supposed to do that!

I think we (or at least me . . lets leave you out of this) needs some help. Though actually I'd guess your relatively safe as she seems deferential, even a bit timid to you (a male) but all aggressive with me (an older LGBT female). But such is the way of the world . . LOL!

I'm going to once again try Wikipedia:Resolving disputes tactics. But just in case they don't work, how (& who . . . which group or person) do you suppose I should go to go get an admin to help? Suggestions welcome she says as she ducks for cover CyntWorkStuff 03:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd say, yes, go through those channels and I'll support you on it as well. I have no idea why she's not just being nasty to both of us – perhaps because I've been involved in some editing disputes against anti-feminist POV warriors as well (hey, I try to be even-handed). By some odd coincidence, I also stirred up a shit-storm the other day on a debate about sex work over at Punkassblog. I posted a link to Weitzer's article (as Iamcuriousblue, my "blog name") and criticisms of Farley, which raised the ire of the anti-porn feminists who post there, including Samantha Berg, a Portland-based anti-porn activist who I'm pretty sure is also an associate of Farley and Craft. Peter G Werner 03:36, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I forgot to add, that typically when somebody is really on a roll like this, I'll sometimes wait a few hours or whenever they seem to be done to start making changes. I just don't have the patience for hot and heavy edit wars anymore. I did, however, move all of those quotes over to Wikiquote. They're entirely appropriate there. Peter G Werner 03:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Well I just put another "hi again . . . let's try this introduction & getting to know each other stuff again" entry onto her "mytalk" page. Do you think the problem is that she just dosen't know the difference between and article and a personal page? CyntWorkStuff 04:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

dyk

On 24 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article History of slavery, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Blnguyen | rant-line 00:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Correspondence Publishing Committee

Hi. I wanted to thank you for your work on various political pages including the Correspondence Publishing Commitee, New Politics and Julius Jacobson. I know very little about how to edit wikipedia so I appreciate you working on these pages, including at least one I had created. Perhaps you would be interested in contributing to the Facing Reality page as well given your apparent specialist knowledge? Thanks Rmalhotr 13:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Kilgallengarage.jpg

Regarding the above image, although you have released this to the public domain, you actually only own the copyright to the photograph, which is considered a derivative work of the art itself, the copyright for which is owned still by the artist. As such, it also required a {{art}} fair use tag. Please see Commons:Derivative works for more information. Thanks. Regards, howcheng {chat} 00:01, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On 1 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mission School, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 22:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Mushroom id

Hi, I was looking for a mycological guru to help me identify mushrooms on the photo I took. Seems like you fit the description ;) I don't know much about mushrooms so it might be easy might be not, but if you need help I found this survey [5] done in 2004 which list everything that grows in Oversley Wood (the place where I took that pic) Would be great if you could help. --ro|3ek 23:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Its often not possible to identify a mushroom with just a photo, since there are other characteristics like spore color, microscopic features, etc that are critical to ID'ing a mushroom. (Also, I really doubt that the above survey name "everything" growing in Oversley Wood.) My guess would be some kind of Cortinarius, but I could be wrong. Peter G Werner 23:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Mission School

Just wanted to say thanks for your help in orgainizing the Mission School article. Peter G Werner 02:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem dude! Steve 14:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Classification of fungi

Hey Peter (you're more of an expert than me in this area... :), do you know whether the new classification as detailed on this page Mushroom Taxonomy: The Big Picture are pretty mush universally accepted? If so, there is some tweaking to do (eg all amanitas are listed as being in Amanitaceae rather than Pluteaceae, and waxcaps in Tricholomataceae etc.). cheers, Cas Liber 01:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

No, because there have been so many important breakthroughs even since 2001, that that classification can already be considered dated. The Phylum Zygomycota has been found to polyphyletic, consisting of some 5 different evolutionary lines, and the Glomeromycota (VAM fungi) have already been broken out of this group and elevated to Phylum/Division status. A bunch of changes in the Agaricales, too – first in Moncalvo, 2002 and soon in another paper coming out, I forget in what journal, that's a 5-gene phylogeny of the Agaricales, that pretty much nails down its overall structure. (I've seen a pre-publication copy of this paper, but I'm not supposed to discuss any details until it goes to press.)

Oh cool! I can't wait............Cas Liber 05:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Agaritine

I hate reading these things as I have a big bag of mushrooms in the fridge I was about to fry up when someone pointed me in the direction of this compound. I was wondering whether much more had developed in the last few years in terms of assessing the carcinogenicity of Agaricus bisporus....and whether/how to mention it on the Button mushroom page..cheers Cas Liber 05:19, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Agaritine is a hydrazine, and all hydrazines in theory are carcinogenic. (Practically all mushrooms contain some sort of hydrazine.) On the other hand, there are absolutely no epidemiological studies linking consumption of Agaricus bisporus and an increased cancer rate, and precious few studies in lab animals suggesting this. In my opinion, there's not much to worry about in this regard.

Bela Toth at University of Nebraska Medical Center is the expert on this. You might want to check out his page at http://www.unmc.edu/Eppley/faculty/f_toth.html. Peter G Werner 08:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Alert

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry's Place (3rd nomination). Fys. &#147;Ta fys aym&#148;. 10:34, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

re: Rigo 23

Sounds good. It took me a while to find the cite in [6], and although a better source would be phenomenal I'm completely fine with that. Nice work on the article! Snoutwood 19:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I wish I could find a better cite, too, but so far, that's the only source I have explaining why he dropped Rigo+year in favor of "Rigo 23". Peter G Werner 19:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe we should put it at Rigo (muralist)? That would deal with the pen name issue, as well as all 19 of the year-end names he's used. What do you think of that? Snoutwood 21:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I considered that, but the problem is that he's never used just Rigo. Peter G Werner 21:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Also - I "google tested" it – a search for "Rigo 23" turns up the largest number of hits concerning him. Peter G Werner 21:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)