User talk:Dr Lindsay B Yeates

Conflict of interest policy
Hello, Dr Lindsay B Yeates. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. --Ronz (talk) 23:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Hugh Boyd M'Neile statue
Hi Dr Yeates, I went to St George's Hall before the Liverpool meetup, but there was a wedding being held there, so I couldn't get in to photograph the statue. And by the time we'd left the pub, the hall was closed. So unfortunately I wasn't able to get a picture for you. I'll try again next time I'm in Liverpool, but that might not be for a while - next meetup will be in August, and I don't think I'll be able to attend anyway, so unless anyone else is able to take the picture, it might not be till October. I'll put a note on the August meetup page. Bazonka (talk) 13:06, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your effort on my behalf. I'm most grateful.122.106.92.188 (talk) 14:03, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Statue in St George's Hall, Liverpool.jpg Hi Lindsay. Is this the right statue? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:57, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely! Ever so grateful for your kindness, Dr Lindsay B Yeates (talk) 13:54, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Your revert of my "typo" fix Fred Swift
Regarding this please see MOS:QUOTE which suggests that these typos be corrected as they are trivial (but improve readability). --LilHelpa (talk) 23:02, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Thought experiment
Thank you for fixing the link to your dissertation on thought experiments.

You start the dissertation with a recital of the Blind Men and the Elephant. Have you done a logical analysis of that? You'll have noticed that it is deeply instructive in a number of ways as well as hopelessly flawed. Isn't this true of all empirical thought experiments? BlueMist (talk) 04:26, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I hope that you find the dissertation, and the non-typical perspective from which I examined the entire process of thought experimentation, useful and informative. Yes, I have noticed that the poem it was "deeply instructive" on many levels (and that's why I included it); and, of course, it is deeply flawed. I have not done a logical analysis of the poem. I must state, however, given my studies in oriental cultures, particularly ancient Chinese, I am very well aware that the sorts of notion expressed by the American poet (John Godfrey Saxe) have been around for a very, very long time.Dr Lindsay B Yeates (talk) 06:39, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Fair Use in Australia discussion
As an Australian Wikipedian, your opinion is sought on a proposal to advocate for the introduction of Fair Use into Australian copyright law. The discussion is taking place at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board, please read the proposal and comment there. MediaWiki message delivery MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Australian Wikipedians. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery