User talk:Dean winiarski

Welcome!

Hello,, 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: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Lectonar 13:40, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

OI
Hi Dean, I'm going to put back that last section you reverted. Please have another look at the talk pages, I'm sure we can work something out. brenneman (t) (c) 03:21, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Dean, Sorry for my brevity before. I hope that you have looked at the talk page, in particular my comments about the poor treatment you've received. I also would hope that my comments there make it clear that I replaced the OI section not due to my personal feelings. What I would recomend is that you go back to the talk page and create a new section (use the + next to the edit tab). In this section make your case as to why this section should be removed.

Things to avoid:
 * The history of the OI section, revert wars, discussion, etc. Were I you, I would not mention this at all.  I can talk about it, because I wasn't really in it, do you see what I mean?
 * Your relationship to OI. Not that you'd be trying to hide anything, but to avoid any impression of bias.  You know, say "Information is available on the group to anyone who asks" as opposed to "If you ask me, I can tell you."
 * Excessive length. Be as brief as you can, no longer than fifteen lines, say.  This is for the benefit of other parties who become involved.  Much shorter than this message, in other words!

What I say:
 * The religion section focuses on Christianity alone, it should either go or be broadened. See Systemic  bias.
 * The OI section is amazingly focused, to the point of making a point. Either remove it, or place it under "Attempts at recovery" with other methods.  (Note: I'm not actually saying that Infantalism is a disease.  A NPOV title will emerge.)

I hope that we can make Wikipedia a place that you can enjoy being, and I hope that this will be sorted out so that you have the space to see that it can be fun and enriching here. Oh yeah! Almost forgot - everything I say is just crap, just like everything everyone else says. So if you don't want to take my advice, I won't be upset or take it personally. WP:IAR ^_^ brenneman (t) (c) 05:44, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Dean, Thank you for your summary of why OI should not be included in the infantilism article. It was, as you said, very long! I understand that you're frustrated and have a lot to get off your chest, and I do empathize. I've taken the wild liberty of summarizing your points on the talk page, and moving the main body with a link. If you object, please let me know in the first instance and I'll change it back. That being said, I cannot imagine a successful argument for inclusion of OI in this article. (Assuming you're being truthful, of course!) For anything with thirteen people in it to warrent inclusion, you'd need to hold your meetings on the steps of the U.N. And, as to the hostility... well, again I empathize. I'm trying very hard to be understanding with everyone involved. Life must be difficult for an extreme outsider, and you get snarly. It's easy for me to not take it personally, I'm just trying to be a good editor for some articles that need it badly. It's not my life. brenneman (t) (c) 15:37, 11 August 2005 (UTC)