User talk:Plskmn

Dated cleanup tags
Hi, thanks for your message, SmackBot does not generally add tags, but merely dates those that are already there. In this case you want User:Skysmith. Regards,Rich Farmbrough, 16:55 11 May 2007 (GMT).


 * P.S. it is usual to add comments to the end of talk pages. Rich Farmbrough, 16:57 11 May 2007 (GMT).

Polska (dance)
Contentwise, the article is fine. What it needs is the defition in the beginning, wikification (adding internal links, for example) and the headings you mentioned. For more info you could look at the Manual of Style. You could also have a look at the WikiProject Dance - Skysmith 17:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Sock?
Hi,

Are you the same user as user:cpgruber? If so, you should be aware that there is a policy on sock puppeting and it should be avoided. Honest mistakes happen, if this is the case you can easily get an admin to deal with your old account. WLU 20:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Please post on user talk pages rather than user pages. WLU 21:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Rorschach
I also am opposed to displaying the image, but not because of copyright issues. The copyright on the image has expired, although Hogrefe and Huber have a trademark on the test as it is printed on the cards. You obviously didn't bother to read the heated debate that has raged on the Talk page for many months (some of it was archived after your edits). The page has been protected from further editing several times because of edit wars over displaying the image. Things finally settled down recently with a compromise to make the image available only if the user clicks a link (to allow the user not to invalidate the test if he ever takes it). Your edit may very well cause the page to be protected again. Please discuss such a major edit on the Talk page before making the edit in the future. Thank you. Ward3001 15:33, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Basically I agree with everything you say, although I'm not quite sure what you mean by a "take down" link. The link to the image now allows the reader to see the image if it is clicked. This controversy has raged on and off for over a year now. If editors like you and me make "anti-display" comments on the Talk page (or even discuss the image without taking a side), it seems to fan the flames and the "display" advocates jump on the bandwagon and add the image (without the click-to-see). So my approach has been, if the image is not immediately seen when opening the article, I don't mention it. That's the way it stayed for a month or two, but has recently flared up again. I'm not trying to tell you what to do, but my opinion is that if you continue to discuss the issue, someone will soon start an edit war and the page will be protected from editing again, possibly with the image displayed. Ward3001 22:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I think a point you made epitomizes the attitude of most (if not all) of the advocates for showing the image: "We are going to do it because we can." And I also think the next step in this argument has manifest also: "We are going to show you that we can do it because you don't want us to." That having been said, you are quite entitled to discuss any issue on the Talk page as much as you wish. I was making an observation from over a year of dealing with this issue, but obviously I can't predict with certainty what will happen. Ward3001 13:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

A note re: Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review
Please be advised that I have recently conducted a review of the Rorschach test (formerly Rorschach inkblot test) talk page and archives. At some point, you have commented on the issue of the display and/or placement of the Rorschach inkblot image. Based on my understanding of your comment(s), I have placed you into one of three categories. I am issuing this note so that you can review how I have placed you, and to signal if this is an appropriate placement and/or to make known your current thoughts on this matter. You may either participate in discussion at the article talk page or leave a note at my talk page; but to keep things in one place, you should also clarify at Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review/addendum. Longer statements may be made here or quick clarifications/affirmations based on several pre-written statements can be made here. Best regards, –xenotalk 14:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Further to the above, we would appreciate if you could briefly take the time to place yourself below one of the suggested statements here. If none of these statements represents your current position, please compose your own or simply sign "Not applicable" under "Other quick clarifications". Likewise sign as N/A if you do not want to participate further in this debate. If you choose not to respond then you will likely not be counted with respect to further consensus-determining efforts. –xenotalk 14:40, 16 June 2009 (UTC)