User talk:Antelan/Archive 1

NOTICE! -

'''If you are here to reply to a comment I made on your talk page, please DO NOT reply here.

Please reply to my comment on your talk page. I will watch your Talk page and respond. '''Likewise, if you initially comment here, I will reply here.

If you want to know when I reply, you can add my Talk page to your Watchlist. Thank you for helping to centralize the discussion!'''

Welcome, Antelan! :)
Hello, Antelan, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: 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, please leave me a message.  Srose  (talk)  19:39, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * Also feel free to make test edits in my sandbox.
 * Thanks for the smile!! Wow, have you been editing as an IP?  You seem to have a lot of knowledge about how to do things around here. :) It's always good to see a knowledgable newcomer.  Please let me know either through email or on my talk page if you need anything at all. :)  Srose   (talk)  19:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey Antelan, how is everything? Lewsan 21:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course I know it's you JP, no one else calls me Sweet Lew : ) Lewsan 06:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Sig Testing
-- Ante lan  talk  06:29, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

RFC/discussion of article Glyconutrient
Hello, Antelan. As a prominent contributor to Glyconutrient, you may want to be aware that a request for comments has been filed about it. The RFC can be found by the article's name in this list, and the actual discussion can be found on Talk:Glyconutrient, in case you wish to participate. Thank you for your contributions. -- ju66l3r 04:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * UnderstoodDGG 05:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 08:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Nominating articles for deletion with pre-existing debates
Hi. I notice that you were trying to append the closed debate Articles for deletion/Autocoitus to today's AfD roster. If you do intend to renominate the article for deletion, please follow the instructions on WP:AFD for renomination. In brief, As a general rule, closed debate pages should not be edited. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 06:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Add 2nd on Autocoitus,
 * 2) Use the "preloaded debate" link on the resulting box to write your nomination, and
 * 3) On Articles for deletion/Log/2007 March 29, use   instead of.
 * Kaustuv - thanks for the heads up. I wasn't aware of the pre-existing debate until I my new debate notification was posted; thank you for your instructions, which are very helpful. Ante  lan  talk  07:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Sandbox Parapsychology Article
I noticed that you've been making a number of edits to the parapsychology article. I have been working on a rewrite of the article for some time now in my Sandbox''. I'm really striving to make the article comprehensive, neutral, and scientifically responsible...that is, I'd like to acknowledge the small steps that academic parapsychology has made toward scientific legitimacy, but without creating the false impression that they have over-turned any paradigms. You seem to be a fair-minded editor, and your input would be welcome. Please join us. -- Annalisa Ventola (Talk 03:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Paranormal arbitration
I noticed you posted a reply in "Evidence provided by Tom Butler". In case you weren't aware, at the top of the page it explicitly asks us not to make any edits in other editors' "evidence" sections. (But if you provide a diff showing Tom's edit, or failing that quote it verbatim, you can cite it as evidence and reply - as long as it's in your own evidence section.) You made a good point, and I don't want there to be any problem with it. SheffieldSteel 13:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ahh, thank you for pointing out my error. I will fix it. Ante  lan  talk  18:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

NPOV
The evidence page isn't the place for a discussion. And you would be quite right to use the wording you propose from Britannica, if and only if you could source it. But of course you couldn't, because it is a sweeping negative claim, which is not sourcable. Britannica doesn't operate under the restrictions of Wikipedia. Britannica allows its authors to express opinion.  Martinphi  (Talk Ψ Contribs) 01:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * For future reference, in case others should read this, I presume you are referring to this edit. That edit contains findings of fact that I consider to be appropriate to the evidence page. On the other hand, this edit of yours contains only interpretation and argumentation, not evidence. Ante  lan  talk  01:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Antelan, I hope you aren't angry. I only meant to say that discussion back and forth should be conducted outside the evidence page.


 * I doubt the Arbitrators will think that Britannica policy is relevant to Wikipedia, which has, explicitly, a very different policy regarding sourcing of claims.  Martinphi  (Talk Ψ Contribs) 04:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Martin, I'm definitely not angry, and I appreciate your comment. Wikipedia and Britannica's policies are not in lock-step, but I still find Britannica to be one useful source. It's a piece of evidence, but it may not be convincing to the ArbCom. If it's not a meritorious finding, I trust they'll stick to the evidence that's most pertinent. Ante  lan  talk  02:43, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Right.  Martinphi  (Talk Ψ Contribs) 19:24, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

YechielMan's RFA
Thank you for participating in either of my unsuccessful requests for adminship. Although the experience was frustrating, it showed me some mistakes I was making, and I hope to learn from those mistakes.

Please take a few minutes to read User:YechielMan/Other stuff/RFA review and advise me how to proceed. Best regards. Yechiel Man 21:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

My user page
It is Ok to carry on a correspondence with an arbitrator on their user page. Fred Bauder 01:18, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup templates
Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup" etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 12:46 18 June 2007 (GMT).
 * Very good to know. Thanks for the link. Ante  lan  talk  18:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The 40,000
From Talk:Mannatech: "With an email list of 40,000 on my blog RSS, all well educated on this matter, I believe we may make a bigger point as a group." Conflict of interest? I have coached over 40,000 patients and clients over the years and A wellness and nutrition expert, Dr. Tom is also a highly successful and sought out entrepreneur in the 5th Top Small Business in America (Forbes Nov. 2006) and the 12th Hottest Growth Company. Jim Dunning | talk  23:31, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Impressive research, JimDunning. Here is another website from the blog that you found. Ante  lan  talk  23:45, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, this diff followed by this diff make almost trivial to conclude that IP 76.105.197.64 is the same user as Cosmochao. This probably isn't a big deal, since Cosmochao has since become much more familiar with WP rules and customs at this point. Ante  lan  talk  11:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

new task force
Hi Antelan, I was noticing your mannatech edits and wondering if you might be interested in this new project also at an intersection of business and science. Please come by and have a look / let me know what you think. cheers Cyrusc 06:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)