User talk:Gleng

I have left WP. Leave comments here if you wish, but they may not be read.

Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher131 11:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Your third link in the section on "Dishonesty" on the evidence page (currently link #206) appears to have a problem. Guettarda 17:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

What is V RS?
In here you have used the term V RS many times, I was wondering what it meant? Thanks. iamthebob 02:13, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I was referring to WP: V and WP: RS - sources that are a) verifiable and b) reliableGleng 07:06, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, thanks a lot! iamthebob 21:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to see you go
And good to see you back. ... Kenosis 02:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Gleng, I wish you well at Citizendium. You've been an excellent source of reason, especially on a page hijacked by a lone looney with a warped obsession.  Ciao.   &#0149;Jim 62 sch&#0149;  22:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * You don't know me (and I don't really know you), but I just wanted to tell you I enjoyed reading the information you left on your user page... you very clearly put a fascinating set of ideas. On the basis of what you wrote I have to say I'm sorry to not have you here as well. Ben Tibbetts 19:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience
This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.


 * is banned from editing articles which relate to science and pseudoscience. The term "pseudoscience" shall be interpreted broadly; it is intended to include but not be limited to all article in Category:Pseudoscience and its subcategories.
 * Tommysun and are placed on probation. They may be banned from any article or subject area which they disrupt by aggressive biased editing. All bans to be logged at Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience.  * is banned from editing Eric Lerner, Plasma cosmology, Aneutronic fusion, and any pages, excepting talk pages, related to his real-life work.
 * is cautioned to respect all policies and guidelines, in spirit as well as letter, when editing articles concerning some alternative to conventional science. This applies in particular to matters of good faith and civility.

For the Arbitration committee. Thatcher131 02:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Spiked interview of our notable Wikipedian
Spiked-online, in collaboration with Pfizer, queried Gareth Leng in a survey of 134 "Key thinkers in science, technology and medicine.

Come back!
Wikipedia is an open forum reflective of a society that is controlled by people of all stripes, including people who are loud and ignorant, who jump to superficial and erroneous conclusions, who use intellectually thin reasoning, etc.

Although I empathize with your frustration, know that your presence here is vital and that your input is highly valued. Please put aside your frustrations with this imperfect forum and continue to help break down the walls of academic elitism, as it is an honor to have you here.

I have valued your input, and I am asking you to come back.

Alexfox29 (talk) 04:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Welcome Back Gareth!
Glad to see that you have rejoined the project. I don't think I was editing at all before you left, but I have still managed to come across some of your contributions. Your input is certainly welcome over at Chiropractic. Cheers, DigitalC (talk) 12:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Welcome back!!! (even though I started editing Chiropractic after you left.) ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 12:21, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience
The Arbitration Committee has rendered decisions passing a motion to apply discretionary sanctions remedies to the case linked above. Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict ("articles which relate to pseudoscience, broadly interpreted") if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.

The final text of the motions can be found at the case page linked above.

&mdash; Coren (talk) for the Arbitration Committee, 14:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Invitation to CfD Category:Pseudoskeptic Target Discussion
I noticed that you have edited in related areas within WP, and so thought you might have an interest in this discussion.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 18:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)