User talk:TardNarc

RFC discussion of your username (TardNarc)

Hello, TardNarc, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! Wikipedia has a policy on what usernames editors can use. Unfortunately, concerns have been raised that your username may be incompatible with that policy. You can contribute to the discussion about it here. Alternatively, if you agree that your username may be problematic and are willing to change it, it is possible for you to keep your present contributions history under a new name. Simply request a new name here following the guidelines on that page, rather than creating a whole new account. Thank you. -- RJASE1 ^Talk 13:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC) RJASE1 ^Talk 13:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TardNarc. While there had been some discussion here about whether your username met Wikipedia policy on what usernames editors can use, the result was to allow it, and that discussion has now been closed. If you would like to see what concerns were raised, you can still find that discussion in the archive (here). You do not need to change your username. However, if you ever wish to do so, it is possible for you to keep your present contributions history under a new name: simply request a new name here following the guidelines on that page, rather than creating a whole new account. Thank you. -- ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Psychedelic

Hi Derek, I'm Cliff. This is just like the good old days back in ADP! :) In reference to the idea that "the term 'psychedelic drug' has a well-established meaning, I'd like to quote from one of the definitions you cited against Jolb: "a rather imprecise category of drugs". I cannot fathom how you thought that quoting a source that refers to psychedelics in this manner supports your case that the term "psychedelic" has a precise meaning/application as "LSD-like." BTW, we're afraid that RFG ("Golaszewski") is dead. More later, I'm tired. TardNarc

Hi Cliff :) The argument here is not whether dissociatives such as DXM, ketamine and PCP can produce a psychedelic experience, or not even if the term psychedelic should include these substances. The wikipedia editors working on the articles of hallucinogens have decided that for the purpose of clarity, it makes more sense to break the hallucinogens down into three broad groups (psychedelics, dissociatives and deliriants) and then break those broad groups down into more specific subgroups. It was also decided to use this trio in place of the term hallucinogen, as many of the substances under this legal blanket term do not actually produce hallucinations. As for what is or is not included under these broad groupings, it was decided to place each "hallucinogen" under the group it best fit into. Obviously the dissociatives best fit into the dissociative group regardless of whether or not some (or even most) people consider them to be "psychedelic", because we are specifically using the label psychedelic to refer to hallucinogens whose primary effect is not to produce dissociation or delirium. --Thoric 15:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]