User talk:Ontologicos

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 ask your question and then place  after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Aeuio 14:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Links
I noticed that you removed the entire links section because they were vandalized. I personally don't think that that is a good idea because vandalism will happen often and the appropriate thing to do would be just to undo it. But thanks for keeping an eye on it. The fastest way to see this vandalisms is to click on the "watch" on every page that you edit. then when you click "my watchlist" you'd see the last edit of every page, and would automatically know what has happened and who edited. And same for those links to every the enneagram numbers that you removed. If you think that they are POV then stick a NPOV tag on them untill they are fixed, rather than deleting the links. PS see Enneagram of Personality talk. Aeuio 14:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Enneatypes
You will have a very hard job persuading anybody that you can justify separate articles One (Enneagram) and Enneatype One. Ditto for type two. "In my opinion these pages need to be heavily edited". So get on and do it. Do not create forks. -- RHaworth 14:35, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Enneagram
Greetings. I notice that you've contributed heavily to the Enneagram articles. Thanks so much for your work on this! My wife is an Enneagram student, and has read half-a-dozen books on the subject. I'm curious: from what source do you get most of your info? Are you more of a Palmer student, or did you study with a different school? Anyway, great job with the articles. All the best, – Quadell (talk) (random) 20:53, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi i'd like to email you privately to discuss future edits before uploading. My user page says my email address is available. Martindo (talk) 03:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Nearly four months have passed since our exchange about Arica School. I'm relatively new to WP editing so I don't understand how a POV dispute can get resolved. Official Arica sources apparently are not interested in editing the page, so I'm inclined to just chop the last two paragraphs of the final section (Protoanalysis). Would that suffice to make the article POV and resolve the dispute? Martindo (talk) 01:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not too interested in any major editing of the article by myself at present. If there are some things that you would like to do to it, however, I would be interested to hear from you if you would like me to provide an email address. Ontologicos (talk) 11:57, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi. Long time no contact. Apparently Skyerise proposed merging Arica School into Oscar Ichazo a year ago, then did it based on her assertion that the latter has greater "name recognition". The latter page is not even a bio (nothing more than his birth and death dates), but simply a container for the redirected Arica content. (In other words, the merge should have gone the other way.)
 * I only became aware of the merge today when her unilateral decision to include an accent in the name Oscar popped up on my Watchlist. Strong evidence was presented in opposition to the accent mark in Talk:Oscar_Ichazo this past April, so it looks like that issue was not resolved other than to default to a generic rule about South American Spanish naming conventions.
 * BTW, Talk:Arica_School is still distinct from Talk:Oscar_Ichazo. I admit I've never done a merge so I wonder if that kind of separation is the norm. It certainly makes it harder to address multiple topics in one Talk discussion. Martindo (talk) 07:59, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Myers-Briggs
Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information, and has been reverted or removed. All information in the encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable published source. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --Janus Shadowsong |  contribs  14:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello again! I think you are doing a good job overall in your efforts to improve Wikipedia.  On the Sensing vs. Sensation issue, however, I believe you are on the wrong course.  "Sensing" is the accepted term for both Myers Briggs and for Keirsey.  Please check their websites if you doubt this.  I understand that Jung may have originally used the word "sensation", but to try to force the commonly accepted "sensing" back into its previous form is counterproductive and distracting, in my opinion.  All the best.  Janus Shadowsong  |  contribs  15:38, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Annoying
This was annoying []. Have some good faith please. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 15:42, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

When you say "Needs third-party references and evidence of notability - otherwise it's original research." what do you mean "original research" they are published studies. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 15:46, 23 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Whether it's "annoying" to you or not is irrelevant. Being published is also not necessarily relevant.  When it comes to research then references to the research must be verifiable in reliable third-party sources.  Instead of getting huffy about being reverted try following the policies on these matters instead.  This will save both of us from silly conflict. Ontologicos (talk) 15:56, 23 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Huffy ... like in knee jerk reverting? Did you read the note? Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 16:04, 23 December 2010 (UTC)\


 * Look this stuff is provoking " silly conflict.  The Enneagram Institute is about as relevant to Riso and Hudson as Arica is to blah blah.  You have run me out the article for now. Are you happy? Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 16:13, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

PA Notice
See. Please avoid WP:PA on my contributions in your notes. Thanks. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 16:46, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * How about trying to address the problems with your editing instead of repeatedly seeking to intimidate me on my talk page? Thank you. Ontologicos (talk) 17:08, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for clarifying that on the talk page of the article on the Enneagram of Personality that the revised edition of "Understanding the Enneagram" was by both Riso and Hudson. Vorbee (talk) 20:18, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Enneagram
My edit to the enneagram type of personality was an improvement of the content and made the page more accurate. I am a subject matter expert and the current version is inaccurate. Zacaum (talk) 18:18, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Zacaum. With respect, the current version is not inaccurate at all. It is true to the actual known facts. I have been studying, teaching and writing on the Enneagram of Personality for over 30 years and am considered by many to be one of the leading experts on its known history. Your version was based on unverifiable speculation that some similar ideas taught in the Christian tradition were somehow explicitly the same thing as the Enneagram of Personality as it was first made definitely known by Oscar Ichazo. These similar "Christian" ideas were actually already found in much earlier Classical philosophy, especially the writings of Plato. Some people want to claim that the EOP is of an even earlier Egyptian origin but this claim is also based on speculation instead of known facts. Whatever similar ideas existed in various places and times before Ichazo we cannot claim with any certainty that the Enneagram of Personality - as such - was ever taught before his teachings about it. Ontologicos (talk) 00:39, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Apology
Greetings. I owe you an apology for the recent criticism I leveled at you, but I will explain my actions. My initial edit to the Enneagram article was done in the belief that there were no reliable sources, according to Wikipedia guidelines. of recent Enneagram studies. This is a result of my personal history and genuinely not feeling how much time had passed in relation to the life of my mind. I was totally incorrect to accuse you of being a self-appointed authority. You were NOT acting as a self-appointed authorty. If you'd like me to copy this to the article's Talk page, I will. Tapered (talk) 23:21, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * @ Tapered ~ Thank you. Your apology is accepted and appreciated. Ontologicos (talk) 07:27, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Google search
I've undone the edit that made this a "hard miscapitalization". So, if you want, feel free to put the link back in, and I won't bother you about it any more. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Enneagram of Personality article
Howdy. hanks for your edits on this page. Good to see that someone has such an expert understanding of the Enneagram, unlike so many other editors (both pro and anti). Keep up the good work. Afterwriting (talk) 04:06, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)