User talk:Keria

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! —Cswrye 22:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Your post to the RD
Your joke about Canada falling on Mexico was without a doubt the funniest thing I've ever read on Wikipedia. What a howl! Anchoress 08:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Chairs! I think I might have beaten Sturat to it. Keria 09:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Where was it? I want to read it! X [' Mac Davis '] ( DESK | How's my driving? ) 17:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Some question about what country would fall if the US disappeared. - Keria 17:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This might be it. ;-) Rfrisbietalk 18:50, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
AndonicO's Happy Holidays template

Speedy deletion of John Smith Wrinkle meat
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages such as John Smith Wrinkle meat, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. jonny-mt(t)(c) Tell me what you think! 11:08, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: John Smith Wrinkle Meat
Hi Keria,

So I owe you an apology. I tagged your new article thinking it was a hoax and then read your comment when checking back through my recent contributions (writers of vanity and spam pages tend to remove the CSD tags themselves). Based on your levelheaded response, I did a little bit of Googling around and found too many mentions of this guy to dismiss him off-hand as a hoax. Long story short, I'm sorry I tagged your valid page.

People make up religions, countries, currencies...you name it. So when I read about a 130 year-old man named "wrinkle meat"...well, you saw what happened. However, as a way of (hopefully) making amends I've added your page to my watchlist and will come back to do what I can to make it ready for general consumption. My apologies again, and happy editing! --jonny-mt(t)(c) Tell me what you think! 11:23, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your kind comment jonny-mt. Maybe it should be proposed for speedy renaming though as I think I might have made a mistake in naming the article without using the parenthesis for John Smith's nickname. What do you think? Keria 11:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I was bold and went ahead and moved the article to John Smith (Native American). Given the huge number of John Smiths in the world, I think this is probably the best title for the article. --jonny-mt(t)(c) Tell me what you think! 11:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you jonny-mt. If no-one beats me to it i'll add the article to the john smith disimbiguation page Keria 11:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Darkest Ink
I could help you with your question (What is the darkest, most opaque Indian/Chinese Ink available in Europe?), but there are missing indications I need to be helpful: More simply, what do you intend to write, draw or paint? It may also be a good indication to tell where you intend to buy your ink, as it is often difficult to find the desired one in a place you can go to. For my part, I do have to buy them alternatively in Morocco, London and other places, according to the type of ink, lac and tools I need… — Kanġi Oĥanko (talk) 00:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Are you looking for Chinese, Indian (though stated as being synonyms, these are not real equivalents) or yet Semitic-type inks — they're different for sure, due to basic composition, lac, etc.
 * 2) Will you apply it using pens (and: traditional or modern?), qalams or brushes?
 * 3) What kind of paper will you use?
 * Hello Kanġi Oĥanko. Thank you for your questions. The problem is very simple though. I'm simply looking for the brand a what is commonly known (wrongly I'm sure) in the west as Indian Ink (I only mention Chinese because it is a name used in a lot of countries) i.e. the prediluted carbon based ink used for example by modern comic artists. I'm looking for the darkest one. I have been using the brand Pelikan so far but I find it too transparent and I need something jet black to use with a brush for drawing/painting stark black and white portraits. I know there exist special brands in the US for comic artist that have names such as "Extra black" or "super black" but I could not find them in the UK or mainland Europe. I think there exists brands of concentrated ink that is more viscose and blacker than your normal ink but I'm not sure about that. The paper is a common thick fine grained white paper. So to sumarize: I'm looking for the darkest non-viscose ink there is to buy. Thanks. Keria (talk) 10:31, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Excuse me for answering so late &mdash; I did not see your post (next time, please leave your message on my talk page). You're quite right: 'Pelikan' is not that dark (when I come to compare what I do nowadays and what I did some 30 years ago with the same ink brand, it seems to me that opacity and brilliance have decreased &mdash; but this is also determined by the quality of the paper used). I only use it for sketches now… As I use such inks for calligraphy (and prepare traditional, black or colored mixes), I fear I couldn't be really helpful.
 * But, just in case &mdash; for the most part, I buy necessary ingredients either in London, Stockholm or Morocco. It's easier to find this in a cosmopolitan city… But I guess you'd better go to the best specialized retailers in your area and ask them, call drawers and designers or drop into one or two workshops and talk with artists, make some trials etc., until you get what you're looking for.
 * Something else, made in Japan, may be very satisfactory for you, as it is both night dark and really functional. This a “ fountain brush ”, i.e. it works like a fountain pen. You insert special, replaceable cartridges (I have a marked preference for those 5本入 - KF-5 type, made by 呉 [Go], reference #7〈7号くれ竹スペアーインキ〉marked『黒』 (“Black”) &mdash; to my mind, these are the best, but there are other brands) into the body of the brush. I use a 墨液くれ竹万年毛筆 (Fluid ink, mid-size, ‘Hake’ type, soft hair brush) for some 17 years, with full satisfaction, without any problems. With its cap, it really looks like a fountain pen, you can have it in your pocket without accessory material, and it never dries. Ain't it practical?
 * I saw that some European retailers sell them for years.
 * Have a nice day. — Kanġi Oĥanko (talk) 05:59, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia conversions
If you're going to tinker with Wikipedia conversions and MP3 players, you might want to be aware of flite. -- SEWilco (talk) 19:31, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Shrooms
Hi Keria,

I was interested to read your response to my removal of your response to the "Shrooms" question on the reference desk, and I have been looking forward to finding the time to respond adequately. What follows is a necessarily lengthy response to explain my philosophical position, beliefs, values and justification of my actions.

My impression of your response initially was that you were advocating a "harm minimisation" approach to the use of illicit substances. Many governments and health agencies use this approach in dealing with public consumption of both licit an illicit substances, and do so amidst a variety of public support and opposition to these strategies. The supporters of harm minimisation tactics rationalise the approach by arguing that these problems are only going to be pushed underground, with the potential of creating even worse problems, or at least just not dealing with existing problems, if the public position on the use of these substances is zero tolerance. This is certianly a valid argument, and to that end there are many harm minimisation strategies in place the world over that seem to work well. I can think of several examples. There's the addition of thiamine to many alcoholic beverages, to attempt to reduce the incidence of malnutrition states and alcoholic encephalopathy. Many governments force tobacco companies to provide health warnings and contact details for smoking cessation support counsellors on their products. Consumption of cannabis is decriminalised or legal in some areas, to attempt to curb the background crime associated with the production and sale of cannabis products. Many governments and health agencies supply free sterile needles for intravenous drug users, and also provide safe disposal methods, to reduce the health burden of increasing incidence of hepatitis B, C and HIV among intravenous drug users and their social contacts.

Detractors of the harm minimisation approach usually cite the multitude of harmful effects of these substances, in terms of personal physical and mental health consequences, personal social consequences (such as isolation), cost to the economy in terms of work days lost, cost of welfare, public health costs, and social costs such as delinquency, criminality and so forth. When one considers the multitude of costs associated with psychotropic and often addictive substances, its easy to understand why a relaxed attitude in a community to substance abuse might have some fairly far-reaching ramifications that governments and communities would care to avoid.

That's in the real world, though, where whichever method is employed from place to place, there are also certain controls that go with the philosophy - further harm containment measures, if you will, that generally consist of laws and public policies which attempt to control the environment that specific harm minimisation or zero tolerance policies operate under. In the real world, my position on recreational drug use is somewhat dynamic, depending on the substance and the situation. This is a position I have come to by virtue of personal experience, having survived the endemic drug culture that pervaded my adolescence and early adulthood - more often by good luck than good management, as well as from my medical education, clinical experience and futher reading.

On Wikipedia, which is really a very uncontrolled environment, my approach differs, by virtue of the lack of suitable external controls. Here, there is real potential to do unintended harm to people who read the things we say, and selectively garner advice from various sources to form an idea or belief that could lead them to try something that is either harmful or fatal. This is the underlying philosphy I attempt to remain mindful of in all my edits here. I am especially mindful of this because many people reading this are kids, especially teenagers, who may be highly impressionable, highly experimental, and profoundly lacking the insight and foresight to make sound decisions about unquestionably dangerous practices.

Please understand that I'm not trying to morally righteous here. In no way have I intended to convey the impression I'm looking down my nose at you, so if that's the impression you got from my actions, then I apologise.

That said, I'd like to respond to some of your specific comments:
 * First I agree that, from a harm minimisation perspective, your response did have merit.
 * I did not intend my comment of "Don't even think about tripping" to be balanced, I only intended it to be safe, therefore, cogent.
 * Anyone who's ever read Carlos Castaneda's chronicles of personal discovery would be well aware of the potential "positive experiences" that might justify experimentation with psychotropic plants. Notwithstanding those works, and multitudes of others like them, it remains a dangerous practice.
 * Although you didn't tell people how to go about preparing Shrooms for consumption, you provided several details of the accessory preparation that you deemed necessary to maximise the chances of an optimal experience. I'm sure its not too hard to find out the rest.  There were many parts of your response saying "You should..." - That's giving prescriptive advice whichever way I look at it.  For brevity's sake, on the discussion page I abbreviated this, but what it comes down to is this: I steadfastly believe you were giving specific and prescriptive advice relating to the consumption of an uncontrolled and largely illicit psychoactive substance in such a way that may encourage readers to follow that advice.  Because these mushrooms have varying concentrations of active psychotropic substances, and because individuals will have differing physiological and behavioural responses to these substances, some of which would be fatal, or severely disabling, and because you can't guarantee the advice you counselled readers to seek regarding the drugs with respect to potency, safe dosage and so forth, this is dangerous advice.
 * Because you were providing advice about the use of a drug in humans, I deem that to be medical advice. Wikipedia guidelines are clear enough on this - we must not give medical advice on wikipedia.  That's the bottom line, and that's why I removed your response to the question.  Not because I disagreed with your intentions, or the relative merit of the information you provided.

I apologise for the length of this, but these things are indeed complicated, and the brief snatches of time I and many other editors take to edit seldom leave time for full discussions of the sources of personal motivation in our actions. I hope you have some better understanding now of what makes me tick in these situations.

Cheers, Matto paedia  Have a yarn  13:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)