User talk:RealFuturist

Welcome
Thank you, Jeraphine! I'm starting a WikiProject with my class so those links will be very helpful... --RealFuturist (talk) 02:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I know! I was a member of the project for a short while, just to help get it going, and I'm still watching the project page.
 * Note: please don't edit the article Peter C. Bishop with Wikipedia-related things (like userboxes), you have a userpage for that at User:RealFuturist. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 09:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

February 2012
Hello RealFuturist. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Peter C. Bishop, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about following the reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Darkness Shines (talk) 02:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
— Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 08:54, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for the barnstar. It feels good to be appreciated.

By the way, have you taken a close look at the Outline of futures studies yet?

The outline is still very rough, and its tree structure is only in very early development. It is intended to be the hub of this subject on Wikipedia, and capable of showing its scope at a glance.

An indication of the underdeveloped status of this outline is the very vague section "General futures studies concepts". It is basically a holding area for topics that need to be placed in more specific sections.

Those topics also need to be placed in the hierarchy of the outline with respect to each other – currently they're just a flat list, but some are offspring of the others, and this needs to be shown by indents.

Any help you could provide in further developing this outline would be most appreciated.

Thank you. Sincerely, The Transhumanist 05:37, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

P.S.: Another outline you might find interesting is the Outline of transhumanism. It is concerned with potential posthuman futures. It is also further along in development in some respects than the futures studies outline, and includes descriptive annotations to aid learning and browsing.


 * Thank you for taking an interest in our project. I've looked on your page, and it is incredible!


 * I have looked at the Outline, and in fact, with great reluctance, I am about to change the definition of Futures Studies that you placed there. I disagree with two points --
 * Future Studies is not a branch of history. Both disciplines study change over time, but history studies change in the past; Futures in the future, of course.  So they are complementary, opposite sides of the timeline, but one is not a branch of another.
 * And some futurists try to figure out the probability of future events or conditions, but most do not. I'm going to insert a definition from some of our textbooks.
 * I hope those are both OK. I'm reluctant to change or disagree with anything, but my coaches here say it's OK so I'm going to do it.  They tell me that's the culture, as long as it is respectful and well cited.


 * The rest of the outline is truly daunting. I've asked the class to take a look at it, and we'll discuss it in class on Thu night (2/9).  I don't think we can tackle it outright, but maybe over time.


 * At any rate, thanks for your interest. I look forward to working with you and the other WPs who have taken an interest in our project. RealFuturist (talk) 16:25, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of School and university projects/Foresight/Sandbox/Peter
School and university projects/Foresight/Sandbox/Peter, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:School and university projects/Foresight/Sandbox/Peter and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of School and university projects/Foresight/Sandbox/Peter during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 14:39, 19 September 2013 (UTC)