Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:30, 30 October 2007

Template:Edit-top-section New stuff at the bottom, please. Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

An Insight

Misplaced Pages is about creating a body of knowledge that is bigger than an individual's knowledge. That's is power, that's its strength, that's its spirit, that's its essence.

Some people want to restrict knowledge to not go beyond what they themselves know. Some of those people want to make WP:NOR be more restrictive: that gives them a tool (or tools) to use to restrict knowledge.

As you can see I looked in on WT:NOR and made two posts. I'm still looking. I may again stop looking soon. --66.222.28.8 21:21, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

That was odd

Noted your revert. Makes you wonder about the motivation for that specific deletion. Still, it's raining, too much time on my hands if I am thinking about that! BTW, thought the edits were sound and balanced. Where are the crew? Spenny 07:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Assuming good faith, obeying the rules, and not playing ownership games? Hope for the best. WAS 4.250 07:28, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Debate Camp

Debate Camp!!! WOW! What beautiful work! I just got your message about it this morning. I spent what free time I had yesterday on those crazy Mailing Lists, and never even opened Misplaced Pages until this morning. There is much I would like to discuss with you about the Camp. I have many substantive ideas about it but, being as computer-challenged as I am, will need help figuring out how to implement them in the Misplaced Pages medium. Also, could we communicate from now on via email?

THANK YOU!

Michael David 13:40, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

You are very welcome. Just data dump your ideas right here on this page (or at Misplaced Pages talk:Debate camp) and I'll implement and/or talk back. I don't deal with WikiMedia/Wikipedia in any way other than on line editing of WikiMedia wiki-based sites. So no email. It's helpful in maintaining boundaries. The biggest problem you will have with your debate camp idea is to make it seem cool so people will want to participate instead of wanting others to participate. I know computers and[REDACTED] and you know psychology; so what we need now is someone who can make it cool. Maybe you could talk Jimbo into participating? WAS 4.250 14:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Terrific! I do have some questions about the mechanics of setting up the various parts (sections, pages, whatever you would call them) of the Project, but right now I am trying to recruit some Coaches for the Project. These would be the persons who would monitor the discussions and offer advice. I'm also going to take your advice and try and interest Jimmy Wales in it. We'll see. From now on I will communicate with you on Misplaced Pages talk:Debate camp. Talk with you again, soon. I'm excited. I hope we're creating a monster ;-) :-).

Michael David 15:18, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

One thing I forgot to ask, could you place some sort of notice or tag at the top of the Debate Camp main page saying something like "this project is still in development, and not ready for full operation" (or something like that)?

Thanks,

Michael David 17:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. Glad to help. It's your idea. Your ball. Run with it and count on me to help with your being "computer-challenged". WAS 4.250 17:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Do be aware that transparency and non-ownership are essential to Misplaced Pages; so whatever your plans are they have to fit within those constraints. For example, just cuz I put the tag on the page does not mean others can't come along and develop and use the project as they see fit. (So far, no such luck :( ) WAS 4.250 17:34, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tag. As far as my being computer-challenged, my focus has always been on the content not the process - anything more complicated than FileMaker Pro and I'm stuck. Know that I am working on a geriatric Mac. In fact, I bought my very first computers in the early 80s: Two Apple LISAs, which I still have in storage with the original Mac programs still on them. You know LisaWrite, LisaList & LisaCalc. Ah, those were the days :-).

It never occurred to me that someone else might want to come along and develop it. Fine by me, so long as they stick with the original goals. I'll be in touch again, soon.

Be healthy,

Michael David 13:52, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

If someone hijacks the project in a direction you disagree with (happens all the time at wikipedia) we talk to them and see if we can agree on a middle way or agree on one project with internal subprojects or whether it is best to fork off so there are two seperate projects (Misplaced Pages:Debate camp and Misplaced Pages:Fun debate camp). WAS 4.250 14:07, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I've gotten some input about the name "Debate" Camp. I'd like to change it to "Discussion Camp". Would you do this for me on the Project Page - I don't know how.

Thanks, Michael David 13:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

COTA

Thank you for creating the article, but it probably will not have notability and credible sources until the event occurs. On that note, would you like to volunteer or attend COTA? Mike H. Celebrating three years of being hotter than Paris 07:23, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the offer; but regrettably, no, for personal reasons I can't get into. Best of luck to you. WAS 4.250 16:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Account

I replied on my talk page. I believe you are suggesting that "account" is a poor choice of words, and have changed the language to be more precise. -- 67.98.206.2 18:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Well done. WAS 4.250 19:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Influenza categories

Hello again, I wonder if you would be interested in reviewing my proposal for new and reorganized categories for the influenza pages. Regards—G716 <·_C> 04:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your best wishes. We would love to have you drop by and perhaps even help in our project. If you like, you can access our chatroom from the contact link on our homepage. Danny 17:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll do that. Thanks for the invite. WAS 4.250 18:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, hovering over "About" at http://www.veropedia.com/ and selecting "Contact" provides your IRC data (http://www.veropedia.com/irc/irc.cgi). WAS 4.250 23:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Human flu

Human flu, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Human flu satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and the Misplaced Pages deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Human flu and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Human flu during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —G716 <·_C> 02:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

If I had realised that Twinkle would add this to your page, I would have been more careful. Please ignore the tone of the message above -- given your extensive contributions to the project, the boilerplate text above seems pretty rude. I apologise and did not mean any offence. I simply mean to ask if the Human flu page adds anything useful to Misplaced Pages. Best regards—G716 <·_C> 02:20, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Georgi Gladyshev

Hello there.

Given the very grave concerns over User:Sadi Carnot expressed in this ANI thread, I was wondering why you had recreated the Georgi Gladyshev article after it had been deleted by AfD?

I'm sure that recreation was well intended, but it might be useful if you chimed in in the ANI thread I linked above to say so yourself. — Coren  02:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

What is your concern with my creating a NPOV properly sourced article? WAS 4.250 03:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Sadi Carnot (talk · contribs) is probably going to be community banned for a very serious case of spamming and subtle vandalism that spanned two years and many science articles. It was probably just a coincidence that you recreated this article right after his version was deleted. I'm not certain why your version of the article was deleted. I'd like to help clear that up. - Jehochman 03:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

No coincidence. I saw the POV misrepresenrations by Sadi and I was curious how he had misrepresented others' work. I picked Gladyshev as a likely candidate and googled him. I found what seemed to me to be a reliable source and decided he seemed importanrt enough that Misplaced Pages should not be deprived of an article about him just because someone misrepresented his work. WAS 4.250 03:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

It's also a little bit surprising that you were able to find good sources to write an NPOV article on Dr. Gladyshev. We ended up having to abandon the article when we failed to turn any up during the AfD. I guess it's a shame you didn't notice the AfD earlier. Could you share those sources with me? I'd love to be able to help you rewrite the article— I had myself attempted to do so before the AfD hammer fell on it. — Coren  03:12, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I used Google. WAS 4.250 03:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

That's a very good reason indeed, and was also my first reflex (see the AfD itself). Which is why I'd very much like to see those sources. Gladyshev may have fallen into woo-woo now, but he seems to have done serious science before. The problem is that all sources we could find either did not show him to be notable, or looped back to (eandev.org) which cannot be used because it is very strongly associated with Gladyshev himself. I also used Google (and Google scholar), BTW, which is why I am curious. — Coren  03:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing you did not try googling using his middle name. http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=%22Georgi+Pavlovich+Gladyshev%22&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 shows http://www.peoples.ru/science/chemistry/georgy_gladishev/ as its eighth listed link. Clink on Google's "translate this page" limk to get http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://www.peoples.ru/science/chemistry/georgy_gladishev/&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=8&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522Georgi%2BPavlovich%2BGladyshev%2522%26num%3D30%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dopera%26rls%3Den%26hs%3Dutn which was my source. WAS 4.250 03:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

The source appears to have been the same peoples.ru link we found at the AfD. It's not independent, as its text is largely copied from endeav.org. —David Eppstein 03:32, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I know nothing about that. WAS 4.250 03:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Heh. There is nothing to worry about; I was taken in by the same bio myself— on a cursory reading this does very much looks like a respected scientist with lots of awards. For that matter, he may still be, but the veracity of some of the claims in his CV is dubious, and with no better sources to verify the rest of his credentials, we were forced to give up. — Coren  03:41, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

It's in Russian, it's at *.ru, the content has nothing to do with the nonsense that the guy in question was trying to "sell", I question whether you are right in questioning its reliability. But I've not investigated at all; this is all first impressions for me. Assuming you've looked into it, thanks for keeping questionable stuff out of wikipedia. WAS 4.250 03:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

And thank you for trying to salvage an article that we were forced to delete. Removing contents is, like, the opposite of building an encyclopedia after all.  :-) For your own edification, the source you found is basically a copy of http://www.endeav.org, which is about as official as it gets (it's his CV on the website of the organization he leads). And if you look into the awards he claims, some are unverifiable, some are false or misleading and the others come from vanity award mills where you pay to get a pretty plaque/medal and a fancy title. Nothing to inspire confidence. — Coren  04:00, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

It's nice to be a part of group of people as nice as you guys. I enjoyed learning the details of this case that you just provided. Information is fun and nice people that also care about information make the whole encyclopedia building thing that much more special. This is getting too saccharine. Time for me to go to sleep. Over and out. WAS 4.250 04:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back

Hi.

Two notes.

1. When rolling back to previous versions its an idea to ensure you don't inadvertantly remove other useful changes, such as templates (esp. "fact" ones - note they don't claim that the statement is not a fact, just that it requires a source), or changes to references.

2. Please don't rollback to earlier versions that have been changed, and remained changed for sometime, without good reason.

Thanks. Happy editing again.--ZayZayEM 00:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC) Might point out this part of one of the new sources:

Media reports focus on what might happen if the virus mutates to become freely transmittable to and among humans, and many predict huge numbers of deaths if this happens.

In terms of death statistics so far, human avian influenza is not a huge public health issue. As Brown put it, there are 40 million people living with HIV around the world. More people die of traffic accidents in Vietnam than of avian flu.

But a mix of fear, disaster and the unknown makes avian flu a topic of concern. Other factors add to this -- that avian flu marks the arrival of a new emerging infection has a large impact on the poultry industry, a high mortality rate, and the potential to cross national boundaries.

Media focuses on the negative "what if" scenarios. H5N1 is a deal, but "not a huge public health issue" c.f other prominent ones. It is mostly the combination of fear, and potential scope for disaster that makes it one, as well as it's economic impact on the poultry industry.

I like this Richard Brown guy. Far more sensible then a self proclaimed alarmist like Nabarro.--ZayZayEM 05:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

take a look at what I've done at H5N1#Impact_on_human_society. Prose is always preferrable to a list. Especially when a list takes a strong viewpoint, and skips over other details that may be in the text. Please remember the points I tried to make about how innapropriate this section was User_talk:ZayZayEM#Flu_articles when I first started removing it--ZayZayEM 05:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The issue with H5N1 has always been what it might become rather than what it currently is. The scary thing about H5N1 is that it is a completely new thing on the face of the Earth in terms of how it behaves. No other entity that science knows of has behaved like it in terms of mutability (it is a flu virus), and virulence (it kills 50 % of humans), and widespread growing endemic presence (this last is the key; until H5N1, no HPAI spread in wild birds; and this virus has continuously increased its ability to infect both new mammal and bird species even up to the present - a new study shows how it is increasing in its ability to kill sparrows).

As for "prose is always preferrable to a list"; while that's true, I'm not that great a writer and I'm really lazy (especially for stuff I'm paid no money to do). WAS 4.250 06:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Everything is "completely new" at some point . H5N1 isn't even that *new*, its just new as a threat. This whole thing about "scary thing", as well as some basic naivity about science reporting is really interfering with your ability to write in a neutral, informative, encyclopedic tone. Some your stuff I don't disagree with, it just doesn't belong in wikipedia. Try FluWiki. Also consider reading this guideline. Writing about things you are really passionate about is just asking for hurt (paraphrased fropm WP:COI)--ZayZayEM 07:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I was doing science research as a physics undergrad before you were born, young man. You have some basic naivete about your own condescending attitude and how it affects your relationship with others. But you are right that H5N1 as a subtype is not new; just the strain that is currently a pandemic threat is new (less than a handful of years). We even have a date for when we knew we had a bi-i-i-g problem. In October 2004 researchers discovered H5N1 is far more dangerous than previously believed because waterfowl, especially ducks, were directly spreading the highly pathogenic strain of H5N1. From this point on, avian flu experts increasingly refer to containment as a strategy that can delay but not prevent a future avian flu pandemic. I'll take the opinion of the experts over yours any day. But you are right about writing about things one is really passionate about - it is genuinely a cause for self refection. And everyone needs editing. I'm glad you are helping with the flu articles. I just wish you would add as much data as you delete. I always saw my role as adding sourced data that then others would polish/edit. I should not have to write a perfect encyclopedia paragraph for it not to be deleted. All I'm saying is don't delete based on imperfect writing. Remember we are trying to create an encyclopedia of all human knowledge - not just what would fit in 20 volumes. If we have room for a TV episode, we have room for some minor point about a pandemic threat strain - it just needs a source and the right context. Deleting and tagging is child's work; try adding sourced data or polishing existing data to make it read better - now that's a job for an adult. Take your latest change to H5N1 for example. The adding of NPOV was good. The deleting of what we don't know was not helpful in my opinion. WAS 4.250 13:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

jimbo, miltopia, block,. drama, etc.

Just to let you know I changed the wording "poll" to "responses". I realise that you were breaking the text into a more manageable section, but I though "poll" was inaccurate - since it isn't a vote. If you change it back to your original name I will not revert it, and you can indicate that in the summary. Cheers. LessHeard vanU 22:37, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I was not sure what to call it. The other sections are also "responses" so I choose not to use that term. Another editor refered to "the poll that is over now" so I went with the term "poll". But the point was mainly to move the table of contents up to the top and since I was doing that breaking the text into a more manageable section was a useful side benefit as opposed to forcing the TOC to the top with some wiki-ism I forget at the moment. "TOC|top" or some such thing. WAS 4.250 22:52, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. As everything that follows are also responses I suppose naming the first as such isn't harmful. My problem with poll is it may give the illusion that "votes" are going to change anything. As I said, if you think your naming is more accurate then please change it back. LessHeard vanU 22:59, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

The term "poll" is questionable for the section. I just could not think of any title that was better. I was hoping someone would improve it. Maybe you did. <humour> Of course the really important thing is for you and me to revert each other on the naming of the section as many times as possible as an object lesson in what not to do. That'll teach 'em ! Create wiki-drama to decrease wiki-drama will they - ha - we'll show them a thing or two ! </humour>WAS 4.250 23:13, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

<humour>Please learn to spell or I will block you! I am an admin, you know!? (well, at the moment, anyway...)</humour>LessHeard vanU 23:21, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I would not take the job of admin if they paid me. I'm just glad enough other people are crazy enough to take the job. WAS 4.250 23:40, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Not as such, no.

Re this comment - the answer is "for some values of anyone". We have had a blocking and banning policy for a good long time, there is no significant dissent from the view that "anyone can edit" does not mean "anyone can use as a forum for foolishness". We block people for consistently unproductive behaviour, and we ban them for consistently disruptive behaviour, and we have pretty much always done so. Incidentally, I think you are skating on very thin ice right now, and it's showing signs of melting. Do take care. Guy (Help!) 15:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Dtobias, please take that as a friendly warning from Guy. For months now you have been "fighting the good fight" but in a way that is annoying to almost everyone, even those of us who agree with you. You are nagging. No one likes to be nagged. So don't be a nag. For example there might be some inane discussion on a mail list and you steal the thread by trying to make it about something else, something we have all heard you opine about (bloviate?) for what seems like a million times. Please be aware that we are all human. People react poorly to being nagged. WAS 4.250 23:13, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

That isn't a "friendly" warning from Guy. If he had said something like "I appreciate your thoughtful comments in debates but I think you're going too far," that would be friendly. But he left an implied threat of a block- "We block people for consistently unproductive behaviour and you're skating on thin ice" is a clear-cut block warning. Guy apparently doesn't agree with Dan T's opinion on the issue and threatening him with a block for it is out of line. Cla68 00:57, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

We disagree. WAS 4.250 01:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I assume that's a nosism. Cla68 02:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

"Nosism" is defined here as "conceit on part of a group; use of 'we' in speaking of oneself" suggesting that you think I meant "we" as something other than you and me. No, I used the word "we" to mean "you and me". You and me disagree. WAS 4.250 05:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)