User talk:Metamagician3000/Archive 9

Second Life media links
This may be useful: User:Metamagician3000/SL archive.

Thanks for your work on Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Thanks so much for all your work on improving the Ayaan Hirsi Ali article and getting it to GA Status. I've almost never edited the article but still wanted to say thanks. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 16:46, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Wasn't it already at GA status? I've lost track, partly from having been away for a bit just lately. Anyway, thanks very much. It's nice to do work that's appreciated. :) Let's see if we can now get it up to FA status, though the work to be done is a bit daunting. Metamagician3000 21:42, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Welcome-back present
Welcome back!

I was poking through the recent AFD logs to see if anything should be brought to the attention of the Physics or Mathematics WikiProjects, when I saw that Electrogoth had been nominated for short-circuiting. Anville 19:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

A very Californian RfA thanks from Luna Santin
Whoo, I'm surprised how many of you all are still fairly active, given how long I've been dilly-dallying about getting these out. Good to see you're still about, doing your thing. – Luna Santin  (talk) 00:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Email
Have sent you one. Orderinchaos 07:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Gere
Hi, I noted your comment on the Wales talk page about the Richard Gere dispute. It may be helpful for you to leave a comment on the Gere talk page. Thanks. FNMF 06:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, good point. Metamagician3000 07:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Yoghurt
I want to start out by saying I'm really sorry that this happened - I did my best to stop it, but sadly I have been overruled by 4 people who are obsessed with name changing (regardless of whether or not I agree with them), and there is a new debate on the Yoghurt talk page about the move - I just felt it would be best if most people who had voted in the past knew about this. daniel folsom 02:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

GAC backlog elimination drive
This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :GAReview underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. --Nehrams2020 23:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Desposyni
Can you temporarily apply an sprotected2 tag to the Desposyni article? The article is being vandalized, despite several requests to stop, by IPs pushing a religious POV and misrepresenting the views of secondary sources. Ovadyah 14:26, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. I semi-protected it with an expiry of a week. Let me know if problems resume after that. Metamagician3000 10:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Ovadyah 12:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Transhumanism
Hello Meta,

Your opinion is requested on the Talk:Transhumanism page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Transhumanism#Fukuyama.27s_criticism

--Loremaster 17:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello Meta,

Your opinion is requested on the Talk:Transhumanism page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Transhumanism#Criticism_of_transhumanism

--Loremaster 19:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Featured article nomination for ocean sunfish article
After lots of work on the article, I've nominated ocean sunfish for Featured Article status. I noticed your post at Talk:Ocean sunfish, and thought you might be interested in taking part in the nomination discussion. I hope to see you there! PaladinWhite 01:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that a fuller lead would help the article a lot. I've added a couple of sentences, but it needs more. The lead should ideally be about three paragraphs and give an overview of the whole article. Metamagician3000 04:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey, Metamagician. Would you mind taking a look again at greatly revised ocean sunfish page, and add your support to Featured_article_candidates/Ocean_sunfish if you believe most concerned are now addressed? Thanks! Fred Hsu 18:15, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

July 2007 GAC backlog elimination drive
A new elimination drive of the backlog at Good article candidates  will take place from the month of July through August 12, 2007. There are currently about 130 articles that need to be reviewed right now. If you are interested in helping with the drive, then please visit Good article candidates backlog elimination drive and record the articles that you have reviewed. Awards will be given based on the number of reviews completed. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :GAReview underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the drive's talk page. Please help to eradicate the backlog to cut down on the waiting time for articles to be reviewed.

You have received this message either due to your membership with WikiProject: Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Good article candidates/List of reviewers. --Nehrams2020 23:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Since...
You're an admin, would you please semiprotect Fighting in ice hockey for 24 hours? It is being vandalized pretty heavily, and WP:RFP seems to have no one monitoring it currently. Cheers, The Hyb rid  13:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but I don't think I should do this. We are always very keen not to protect or semi-protect the day's featured article. I know that the featured article is often heavily vandalised, but conversely a lot of admins and other regulars will be watching it. Metamagician3000 13:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Alright, I can understand that. At the moment it appears that only 2 users and one admin, one of the users being myself and the admin being you, are watching it currently. Do you think that an hour would be acceptable? If not I understand, and I won't ask anymore. Cheers, The Hyb rid  13:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, the calvalry has arrived. Have a nice day, The Hyb rid  14:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

We could use some help
Loremaster has been driven off the featured Ebionites article by a disruptive editor, Michael C. Price. I'm about to leave myself. Michael has a unique perspective on the application of undue weight (that there isn't any), and insists that all POVs must be represented in the article, no matter how fringe. This argument is used to push an extreme POV that is a synthesis, namely that prominent individuals (Jesus, John the Baptist, James the Just, all the apostles except Paul) in the early Church were all Ebionites, and that the early Christian Church in general and the Essenes that preceeded them were all Ebionites. These claims are then used to deny the historicity of orthodox Christianity (and implicity "prove" it is a false religion). My specific objection is that the secondary sources used to support these "claims" don't make these sweeping assertions. Opinions of various sources are woven together in a synthesis which is then put into the mouths of the sources. Even after a detailed examination of the sources reveals they don't say what is claimed, this editor refuses to retract his statements or allow them to be modified. I feel personally that this rises to the level of fraud. We are weary of tracking down every source (some of them are obscure) to verify that what is being stated is accurate. Further, calling the accuracy of any of the claims into question leads to raging edit wars on the talk page. I requested comments from Ft/N, but they have been ignored. I requested an RFC, but there has been no response after two weeks. I also recently posted a request for input on the discussion board at WikiProject Jewish History. Can you recommend a further course of action? Ovadyah 14:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree 100% with Ovadyah. --Loremaster 15:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And so do I. And I would add the tendency to ignore a more mainstream view, restricting "secondary sources" to a few authors that are quoted (not always accurately, see above) ad nauseum and in a way that often endorses them. And a tendency to misread other editors' comments. Str1977 (smile back) 19:08, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It is not a synthesis: see James Tabor. --Michael C. Price talk 16:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)


 * It should be noted that Michael recently made major revisions to the Tabor article, so it would not be surprising to find that Tabor's reported "views" seem to be convergent. Ovadyah 17:57, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Easy enough to check out his book in that case. --Michael C. Price talk 18:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

All the editors that helped to make the Ebionites article FA quality have been run off. Therefore, I am applying an "expert-verify" tag to the article. I will notify AN/I and contact some academics in the field to help. Ovadyah 13:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, folks. I've been on an extended semi-wikibreak lately, while focused on some real-life issues. I'll take a look at what has happened to the article, and on the talk page, but I don't know what I can do to help with what is really a content dispute, if I understand correctly. Is there any consensus among the editors other than Michael? I do think there could be an issue of undue weight here. Metamagician3000 14:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Greetings Meta. Loremaster and I have left the article in disgust.  The consensus among the previous editors, other than Michael, is that the article content has been undermined by editorial syntheses.  I filed an incident report with AN/I, and the article is undergoing an FAR.  It would be a shame to have the article demoted after so much work, but I don't see any other alternative.  The article needs oversight.  Someone has to enforce consensus and the principles of undue weight.  That was why I requested an RFC.  One editor shouldn't be able to disruptively undermine the efforts of three other editors that respect the process of editing by consensus.  I left the same message with Jayjg, but he has been off-Wiki too. Ovadyah 20:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Transhumanism
Your comments are needed in both the Who are these 'transhumanists'? and Too long? threads. --Loremaster 01:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Ebionites content and source cleanup
I left an invitation on Michael Price's talk page to work consensually with the other editors to clean up the problems that have been tagged for some time now. Would you be willing to help? I would like to head off having the article delisted as a Featured Article during FAR if possible. We would greatly appreciate it if you could provide some oversight. Ovadyah 17:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I have filed a request with the Mediation Committee for formal mediation. Please feel free to add your perspectives to the RfM talk page. Ovadyah 00:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Michael Price initially agreed to and then withdrew from formal mediation. A request for arbitration has been filed here to deal with user conduct issues. Ovadyah 18:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies
Your comments are needed in the Talk:Institute_for_Ethics_and_Emerging_Technologies thread. --Loremaster 23:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for November 2007
The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the December 2007 issue. Dr. Cash 01:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Melbourne Meetup
Hello! The Melburnians are having another meet-up! Please consult this page if you are interested to participate in the discussion! Thanks! Phgao 03:28, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Request for Help
Dear Admin Metamagician3000, I'm a newbie and have made some newbie mistakes by not knowing all the detailed rules that go with Wikipedia. I'm sorry for that, and don't make them again when I learn and understand them. Unfortunately, I find myself being flamed to death, by supporter of www.ChronicProstatitis.com, a commercial website, known for spamming and flaming. Please see sci.med.prostate.prostatitis for endless examples of spamming and flaming from www.ChronicProstatitis.com. I am not being allowed to edit the Prostatitis page based on the peer-reviewed medical literature and I am also being flamed there. This person, SKOPP, continually brings up issues that are not related to the actual edits, and "OWNS" the prostatitis page. You can see his views yourself, as they are the only ones allowed there, but if you had to describe his beliefs in one word, in essence he believes that chronic prostatitis is caused by "stress." Please of course see for yourself as it is unfair to have another say what your views are, as SKOPP is constantly doing to me, as he makes Straw Man arguments. Other points of view are not being allowed on that page. Also, SKOPP keeps putting up spam links to www.ChronicProstatitis.com, most recently by defacing apparently copyrighted medical images with billboard links across them. False allegations of sock puppetry have been made against me, but I do not know how to prove myself innocent. I am not on an individual ISP. But I have today asked all others who know about this edit war who support me to stop posting as they apparently do so without signing in. The claim that I am another registered user on that discussion is totally false. The SOUND and FURY of the personal attacks and innuendo against me are far beyond the importance of the edits. I'm a newbie and I'm attempting to contribute in good faith, learning some rules and lessons as I go. Please help. I'm happy to correct anything I do wrong, and I have disengaged several times before to no avail. The page is: Prostatitis ReasonableLogicalMan 17:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I have been trying to work with both these editors over what has been a long running edit war over each objecting to the other's external link. Both seem to have accepted allowing others to review the medical literature (which I shall try to do over the next few days), but I too would welcome anyone else helping out in helping to formulate a consensus as to what the literature supports as NPOV reflection here in wikipedia. Two immediate issues, firstly is the external link to a series of pictures acceptable under WP:EL (certainly the links to the other website have just now been toned down) ? Secondly over nature of chronic prostatitis as to cause and treatment approaches. David Ruben Talk 01:56, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry guys - I'm not around much of late ... hope to return to more active duty soon. I'll have a look at your problem with the article when I get a minute. Metamagician3000 11:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * David, I'm way out of my depth here, having started to look at this. I'll see what sense I can make of it but if it involves reviewing the medical literature it will be beyond my expertise. Metamagician3000 10:02, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Transhumanism
Hello Metamagician,

Your comments are needed in regards to Mikael Häggström's suggestions for major changes to the Transhumanism article. --Loremaster (talk) 20:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. Metamagician3000 10:02, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007
The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles January Newsletter
Happy New Year! Here is the latest edition of the WikiProject GA Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 04:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar
You deserve a barnstar. Axl (talk) 16:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks! Metamagician3000 (talk) 01:09, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter
The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 05:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter
The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 06:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Janeen Webb
I see you have a history of working on the article Janeen Webb. I am looking at it from the project Unreferenced articles where it is one of the longest unreferenced tagged articles that does not meet at least the barest minimum of verifiability. It has been tagged and completely without references since June 2006. It would be extremely helpful if you had some references you could add to the article to help support its verifiability and notability. Thanks for any help you can give.  Birgitte SB  17:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

April GA Newsletter
The April issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is now available. Dr. Cash (talk) 03:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Priory of Sion
Hello Metamagician. The Priory of Sion article is a good article nominee. I'll understand if you are too busy but could you review it to see if it qualifies?Let me know either way as soon as possible. Loremaster (talk) 01:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Forget about it. Priory of Sion has just been listed as a good article. :) --Loremaster (talk) 20:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles May Newsletter
The May Newsletter for WikiProject Good Articles has now been published. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good articles newsletter
Delivered by the automated Giggabot (stop!) 01:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Alison Goodman
I see the nominator did not let you know. Needs sourcing, better evidence of significance. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  13:14, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter
Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Alison Goodman037A92pix.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Alison Goodman037A92pix.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 06:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation
Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are a member of the GA WikiProject. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.

We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:30, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Help !
Hello

First of all I have to say it is a great work what you are doing on wikipedia, realy.

Would you please check this website ( humansfuture.org ), it is a scientific, informative and well made site.

Long time ago it was spammed by some ignorant member and then was blacklisted by some wikipedia adminstrators here.

I tried to convince them to unblock the site to give it a chance to be used on wikipedia as a good source of information but they dont see the value of it, maybe beacuse it is not their field of interest or speciality.

Please I need you to help me and to support my proposal here to get the website unblocked.

That site deserves a chance, right ?

Thank you

--Xhuman (talk) 20:15, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Worldcon GoH Category
There is another attempt to delete the Worldcon GoH category. Since you participated in the last discussion, I thought you might be interested.Shsilver (talk) 22:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive
–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:54, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Technological utopianism
Hello Metamagician.

I was wondering if you could not only intervene to end the dispute I am having with “JackBlack” on the Talk:Technological utopianism page but also help me improve the Technological utopianism article as a relative expert on the subject. --Loremaster (talk) 19:01, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Reverting the article to its pre-dispute version of 4 October 2010 and putting a temporary block on it until the dispute is resolved might be wise... --Loremaster (talk) 19:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not really very active here at the moment. Not enough to sort out this particular dispute. Metamagician3000 (talk) 05:49, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it. It seems like the dispute is resolving itself. That being said, you are more than welcomed to improve the article when you find the time. --Loremaster (talk) 15:29, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Biased editing of Technological Utopianism by Loremaster.
Biased editing of Technological Utopianism by Loremaster.

Due to your past contribution to Singularitarianism, you may want to help editing the Technological utopianism article because currently only one editor is contributing to the article. The Singularitarianism Article could also benefit from your help.

I feel Loremaster is editing Singularitarianism and Technological utopianism in a biased manner in accordance with his Save The Earth propaganda. Loremasters's ideology seems to verge towards Neo-Luddism. Here are the damming facts Loremaster has stated in discussion:


 * Loremaster says he is:


 * Loremaster wants people to:


 * Loremaster sees his editing as a 'fight' and he states:

86.174.64.123 (talk) 12:58, 18 December 2010 (UTC)?


 * LOL
 * 1) In light of the fact Metamagician3000 and I have collaborated extensively in the past to improve and expand the Transhumamism enough that it became a Featured Article, he knows me well enough to know that I have never let my biases prevent me from editing an article from a neutral point of view.
 * 2) Despite the fact that I openly admit to being a technorealist who is critical of techno-utopianism in all its forms, I have let never this point of view influence any of my edits or reverts of the Technological utopianism article. On the contrary, I am the person most responsible for expanding this article with content some would argue is “pro-techno-utopian” (i.e. passages from James Hughes' book Citizen Cyborg).
 * 3) I find it disgusting that User:86.174.64.123 would take comments I made out of context to falsely make it seem I see my editing of any article as part of my fight for the environment.
 * 4) In light of this outrageous act of bad faith, I will do everything in my power to get this jerk banned from Wikipedia.
 * --Loremaster (talk) 13:08, 18 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The comments do seem to be taken out of context, but I don't think talk of trying to get people banned helps either. There'd need to be some kind of record of conduct that violates policies.
 * To the anonymous editor, this is just a suggestion, but do you have an identity other than an IP address? I think it's always helpful to create an identity that you can be known and recognised by, and under which you can build up a reputation as a good-faith contributor. Metamagician3000 (talk) 05:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello Metamagician. The dispute between me and this anonymous user (who sometimes call himself “JackBlack” but refuses to create a user account) has been more or less resolved a few weeks ago. --Loremaster (talk) 05:43, 7 January 2011 (UTC)