User talk:Orangemarlin: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 18:27, 31 December 2007 editOrangemarlin (talk \| contribs)30,771 edits →creationism edit: OK Hrafn.← Previous edit		Revision as of 10:21, 1 January 2008 edit undoTheresa knott (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users22,922 editsm →Contacting people's employers in real life Next edit →
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 139:		Line 139:

	::::The big hook was a giveaway. This fish is moving onto better morsels. LOL. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 17:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)		::::The big hook was a giveaway. This fish is moving onto better morsels. LOL. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 17:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

			==Contacting people's employers in real life==
			Stop trying to justify harassment. Contacting employers IRL is despicable and threatening to do so here not allowed. ] \| ] 09:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:21, 1 January 2008

* Click here to leave me a new message

Getting Started
Misplaced Pages Tutorial • The five pillars of Misplaced Pages How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Misplaced Pages is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Archives

Scary articles

Below are articles articles, mostly medical but some in the sciences, that promote ideas or POV's that might endanger human life. Feel free to add your own, but I'm watching and cleaning up these articles. Please sign if you add something.

List of medicinal herbs-lacks any references, and implies these drugs can help.Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Herbalism-same as above Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Homeopathy-ridiculous Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Attachment therapy-don't let your children go there Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC) This has been rewritten since User:AWeidman (Dr Becker-Weidman) and his 6 socks were indef banned. Fainites 16:45, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Medicinal plants of the American West-more unsourced POV edits Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Alternative medicine-more of the same Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Naturopathic medicine-Actually not completely off the wall, but some parts are bad. Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Er, Duesberg hypothesis and poppers could both use more work, and talk about endangering lives... especially the former. MastCell 18:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I'd also add ephedra to the list... I did a lot of work cleaning it up and it's not so bad anymore (it actually references the serious harms and deaths associated with ephedra supplements in a way that goes beyond referring to the FDA as jackbooted thugs, now). But much of the same material is duplicated in ECA stack, which I haven't been as successful with, and which I fear gives an erroneous impression as to the safety record of ephedra-containing dietary supplements. MastCell 19:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Arguably, Reflexology, though that's probably not actually dangerous, just ridiculously oversold. Adam Cuerden 00:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Vaccine controversy. Anti-vaxers are really dangerous. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Hulda Clark. A dangerous scam. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Gary Null. Advocates nonsense. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Joseph Mercola. Advocates nonsense and repeated run ins with the FTC. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
rebirthing, reparenting, Power therapies. Primal Scream therapy. I would treat Neurolinguistic Programming as the main hub for many of them though. Its a subject that seems to be the main pseudoscientific umbrella that is used by most of them to give the false impression of scientific appearance. Its incredibly widespread and extremely misleading to the less scientifically literate. Here is a good source; . Phloem (talk) 05:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

tools for checking refs?

Hi, I think i saw some back 'n forth between you 'n Sandy 'n Colin about tools for checking references... I would be very interested in learning anything you've learned (both now & in the future). Thanks! Ling.Nut (talk) 01:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind me butting in here. There are two great tools for checking references. The first, older one, is user:Gimmetrow's Reference Fixer, located here. The talk page has instructions on how to install and use it. It is a wonderful tool for fixing the punctuation so that it precedes the footnote. It also moves citation needed and other such tags to the end of a sentence, all automated. The second, brand-new tool is Dispenser's Linkchecker, which is causing quite a stir on FAC. It uses spider software to search for dead links and references in FACs. It can also be used manually to check individual articles. The link to the spider version for FAC is here. Firsfron of Ronchester 07:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again! Those both look like very good tools. Will check them out... Ling.Nut (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 07:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

You do know I was just joshing, right? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

We didn't know you had a sense of humor????? :) OrangeMarlin 01:24, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Revisions to Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event

Hi, I see you did a lot of the recent work on Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event, and the result is excellent. Of course the better an article gets the more noticable its areas with scope for improvement become. I've posted some suggestions at Talk:Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event and would appreciate comments from you and those who helped you to get Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event to its current excellence. Philcha (talk) 14:37, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/The World Without Us

I noticed you have The World Without Us linked to your talk page. The article is at FAC with few comments. Would you mind reviewing the article for its candidacy? --maclean 01:54, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Cool, I will do it. Great book!!!! OrangeMarlin 02:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

creationism edit

My edit to the creationism article was not based on personal analysis, and was aimed at correcting a violation of the neutral point of view policy. It was someone else's personal analysis stating the basis of creationism as faith. I was correcting the wording to what creationism's actual primary basis is: scripture. Can you fix it? If not I'll see if I can fix it later. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.15.84 (talk) 08:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Non. I'm not going to fix it, because it would then be POV. Creationism requires faith, nothing more. All the other stuff is fluffery. OrangeMarlin 08:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

He may have a point. Faith in invisible pink unicorns will not produce creationism. It requires faith in a creation story, and the creation stories in question are ubiquitously contained in scriptures: notably the Old Testament, the Koran and the Vedas. Hrafn_Stalk 13:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, since I know you're one of the good guys, I'll agree. But as I look at it, to believe in the scriptures requires some sort of faith. The scriptures themselves don't create faith. I read the scriptures and laugh my ass off regularly. OrangeMarlin 18:27, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I apologize.

I apologize for the removal. I have not been trying to vandalize, and sorry for removing that. I have been on here for a year and a half. I have never tried to vandalize. Can you please work some deal with me if you do wanna block me? Tech43 (talk) 08:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't apologize to me. The anonymous editor didn't leave much information to decide what is going on. Is there a diff?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Orangemarlin (talk • contribs) 01:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Look, I'm scared right now. I didn't try to do anything. I am on the verge of a mental breakdown. Tech43 (talk) 08:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Spare me your life's story. Please go elsewhere. OrangeMarlin 16:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Forgive my intrusion as an outsider, but that did not sound like a very nice thing to say. Remember WP:NPA 172.209.232.81 (talk) 16:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

OM, don't take the bait... Raymond Arritt (talk) 17:00, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

The big hook was a giveaway. This fish is moving onto better morsels. LOL. OrangeMarlin 17:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Contacting people's employers in real life

Stop trying to justify harassment. Contacting employers IRL is despicable and threatening to do so here not allowed. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC)