User talk:YellowMonkey/Archive68

Archie Jackson
Hi, I would like to improve the above article to GA status at least if possible. I have not written very many cricket biographies (Peggy Antonio being the only other one) and need some advice. As you have written a bucketload of very good cricket bios, any advice you may have about what else is needed to improve this article sufficiently would be very much appreciated. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 01:54, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, I don't know a great deal about Archie Jackson, but I do believe he was known for being a great stylist, something which the article doesn't mention at the moment. Also, it's unusual to see family info and early years in the lead, since normally the details about parents and immigration doesn't go in the lead and only the main cricket highlights and adult stuff goes in the lead. Also I believe I spotted a mistake, since I believe Jackson played 4 Tests against the WI. I think it's normal that for numbers less than tell, we spell out the word, so I would always use "nine matches" or "three wickets" unless it is "3/24" etc. We normally use ndashes for the years and the series results. I changed some of them. In some parts of the article I think it gets a bit weaselly when it simply says the tour was successful or bad without really explaining why. On the other hand I am on the more dry end of the scale with a very statty type of analysis padded out with anecdotes and so forth. I guess you could talk to, , and  to get more variation in writing styles from FA/GA cricket writers. I guess more detail in his Test century would be good if possible, and the other thing that is unusual is that you didn't explain the results on the WI series. I would also have the book in the separate ref section and quote the page individually rather than cting the general book over and over, eg, Arthur Morris. IN some parts the exact illness isn't specified. It would be good to specify I guess, unless all these long breaks were caused by the common cold or such generalities. Apart from that I would increase the lead a bit. But it's a good article I think.  Blnguyen   ( bananabucket ) 06:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the very thorough response (and the copyediting). It has given me plenty to go on with so I had better make a start!  Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 07:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Morris

 * Hey mate. Congrats. Hope you didn't find my interfering too annoying. Thanks for clearing up the cns. Who's next? --Dweller (talk) 11:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

How bout going all alphabetical. Sid Barnes? --Dweller (talk) 13:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Good stuff on all counts. I'll make a start on Barnes with what I can find... and I've asked TRM to help. With three of us on him, and a pic already there, might be quick. btw I see you noticed my post at WT:CRIC about the Stuart Clark vandal's return! --Dweller (talk) 10:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:CRICAUSBIO
That's a very good idea; I have added my existing projects on the page. Thanks once again for for your advice when I was a little stuck about where to go with the article next. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 02:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Economic development in India
I have addressed each and every thing you specified. can you please re-review this article. thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 14:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I generally think one guy doing a unilatel review over and over is not healthy.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 05:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Suwon
Many thanks for your useful discussion of where the Suwon article needs improvement. I'll be sure to address those points. Much appreciated. JPBarrass (talk) 05:41, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:Cograts
Thank you my old friend. You know I was wondering if this is the first time that a government honors a person for his work in Wikipedia. Anyway, I want to share the resolution with you. Take a look here:Press Releases, I'm waiting for better images this week. Tony the Marine (talk) 06:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Barnes
Yes. Good work on those others. Seen Keith Johnson? --Dweller (talk) 09:59, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Errm ok. What about it?  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 05:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

GAN Reviewer of the Month for November
Congratulations! Based on Epbr123's weekly reviews, you were the #1 reviewer for three out of four weeks during the month of November, and are therefore the reviewer of the month! The following information will be included in the December issue of the GAN Newsletter:


 * Reviewer of the Month


 * Blnguyen is the GAN Reviewer of the Month of November, based on the results of weekly judging of the number and thoroughness of reviews performed by Epbr123. Blnguyen hails from ***NAME OF COUNTRY** and has been editing Wikipedia since ***DATE HE JOINED WIKIPEDIA***. He has written and/or contributed to an astounding number of articles, including 7 featured articles, two featured lists, 15 Good articles, and 152 Did You Know? articles.

Please let me know your country and city and/or state of origin, as well as the date that you started editing wikipedia. Also let me know if there's anything else you would like to add. Thanks! Dr. Cash 00:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I started editing regularly in December 2005, and I am from South Australia. User:Blnguyen/Top has the details I guess....  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 05:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Hoysala architecture
Sir, the main page featured article is seeing a lot of anon vandalism. Please consider putting an anon lock for a short while.Dineshkannambadi 20:50, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Done,  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 05:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Persistent block evading
Heya Monkey-man. You're probably a bit closer to the technical workings of this place than I am, so a question for you. A user who's been indefinitely blocked keeps creating new accounts to complain about the block. I'm blocking the new accounts as soon as I'm able, but new ones keep being created. Is there a setting I'm not clicking properly (I tick all three check-boxes when I enact the block) that allows him to do this? Failing that, is there some way of getting the higher-ups to track down his IP address and physically prevent it from accessing the site or something like that? I know it sounds extreme, but he clearly has no understanding that an indefinite block is precisely that. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 01:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, just give me the sock list and I'll bin his computer.... Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 01:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Roger that. The present tally of accounts (he's also used several IPs, do you want them too?) is as follows: "Jc iindyysgvxc", "JcIindyysgvxc67", "Gunasshu" and "I don't know anything else". Those four accounts should all come up as indefblocked if I did it right on the last two or three. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 03:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, give me the IPs. If they are static IPs and nobody else is using them, we can just lock it [in effect binning his computer].  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 03:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The ones I know for sure (i.e. the ones he used to contact me without logging in) are: 124.180.16.217, 124.176.191.127, 124.181.132.145, 124.180.75.102, 124.181.253.139, 121.219.143.190, 124.176.148.148, 124.180.167.117 and 121.219.112.89. Hopefully there are no duplicates in that list :P. Some or all of them may resolve to a school (he initially contacted me about a block on 202.76.162.34, which is a school-linked IP), in which case I'd be happy to send an Email to the headmaster or something along those lines too. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 04:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately his IPs are all over the place and can't really be stopped with a rangeblock, unless you take out a whole chunk of Australia. I'll keep an eye on your talk page though.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 05:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry
I feel I probably owe you an explanation for the rollback I made to your page. It was accidental :) Obviously, I have rolled myself back. Regards, -- Anonymous Dissident  Talk 05:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Not at all. The new userpage had its intended effect then. :)  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 05:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Yarrrr...
You have overtaken me in the Military History articles contest... with only one month to go, I must redouble my efforts to secure the ultimate victory!

(While contributing to Wikipedia in a coherent, useful, and effective fashion, of course.)

Incidentally, 2006 Chick-fil-A Bowl, an article you did a GA review on for me, is up for FAC for the second time. The first time around, it didn't get that third supporter, and failed. I'd really appreciate it if you could swing by the talk page and leave some comments or even support if you think the article meets your standards. Thanks! JKBrooks85 01:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes I noticed. I should look at it soon.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 05:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK
Too many bananas is bad for the health. Cotnains high levels of potassium which is potentially poisonous. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦     "Talk"? 19:17, 3 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 00:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 03:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves
By the order of the coordinators of the Military history WikiProject, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of your efforts in improving the quality of articles related to Vietnamese military history, including the creation of numerous A-Class articles. For the coordinators, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 08:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, thankyou gentlemen.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 05:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Question
A nom of mine (Kazimierz Pużak) is expiring at Template_talk:Did_you_know; could you look into it? There are no objections, just an editorial comment, but even that I know tends to make many updating admins skip over noms. I think its an interesting article that should be DYKed, besides, in my 150+ DYKs I haven't had a one like this dropped before... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I was enjoying my holiday....:) Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 05:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry - you are the first person that came to mind mind when I think 'DYK' :) Feel free to pass it on to somebody else, as I wrote, it's not a controversial issue, just what looks like a simple 'slip through the crack' issue :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I was just joking. I already added it.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 05:46, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

yup
Aha, more to come.... :) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm seeing if there's enough info on Omphalotus nidiformis to get it up - might run it through GA first actually as I feel like I am running a bit blind, also Red-winged Fairy-wren as I just took some nice photos as I like making a complete article, photos and all. Australian Magpie and Tawny Frogmouth were two higher profile ones I was musing on, however I was thinking of some broader ones which happen to be non-aussie like pork, Sirius and two of us still have to give a final spit and boot polish to vampire which makes lion look like a walk in the park...of course as this is supposed to be fun I may completely change my mind if some or all of the above lose their appeal or someone more qualified or keener takes any on.01:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

assistance with mediatin on the Bosnian Mujahideen article
Hi, I'm having a problem with the editors The Dragon of Bosnia and Grandy Grandy who have repeatedly deleted an article which I edit called Bosnian Mujahideen (see edit history here ). He has also deleted links to the article on other articles. He seems to be basing his deletion of the article on two sets of arguments:
 * 1) that the term Bosnian Mujahideen does not exist. In fact the term is used by published (research and books) experts.. I admit though that there are other terms often used, such as El Mujahid, El Mujaheed or just Mujahideen (spelled in various forms).
 * 2) claims the article is based on "false info/original research" or "propaganda attempt or original research if you wish, based on unverified sources per WP:RS". As you will see from the references used in the article it is quite thoroughly sourced from what must be judged to be neutral and/or reliable sources.hmatter. RegardsOsli73 (talk) 00:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: RfCU/case/Peter zhou
I'm sorry to bug you, but the purpose of this RfCU was to flush out any hidden pre-baked socks not to confirm what I already know. nat.utoronto 15:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

E-mail
As the header says. Acalamari 04:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Bingo,  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 01:23, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Acalamari 17:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Yen Bai Mutiny
Hi Blnguyen - full details of the book are:

"Les Linh Tap - Histoire des militaires indochinois au service de la France" - author: Maurice Rives - publisher: Editions La Vauzelle 1999 - ISBN: 2-7025-0436-1

As the title indicates it is a detailed and profusely illustrated history of the locally recruited regiments that France used (and misused) to hold Indochina from 1859 to 1954. The coverage of Yen Bai focuses on the actual mutiny and not the broader political context but it might be a useful reference for any reader who wants to pursue the general topic further.

Congratulations on the way you have built up the Yen Bai article almost from scratch! It now provides really first-class coverage of an important but little known incident.

Regards Buistr (talk) 03:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks,  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 07:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Karan Arjun
Hey! I wonder why you removed all my edits on the page, including the cast section I'd added. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  23:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. I went to the old version in the history and it seems that while you were adding the cast, I was on the old version. Sorry. Great movie, although it was pretty silly...  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 23:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh sorry, my bad. Yeh, great film! The topic is quite silly, but I can't help, it brings me sweet memories from my childhood, like many other 90s films of Salman, Shahrukh etc. Best regards, Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  23:49, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Speed
Sigh. Kirill 03:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Nah, we might as well move along now. Shuffling things back and forth isn't going to be very meaningful at this point, I think. Kirill 04:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

To the opposers in my RfA
I would like to apologise for my intemperate comments during the Melsaran affair. I accept that I should have expressed myself more civilly, and should have waited for the ArbCom to explain themselves rather than jumping to conclusions and condemning them. I can honestly say that I regret my reaction.

In my defence, I would like to reiterate that I did not use the admin tools in any way in relation to the Melsaran affair. I am completely aware that it would be a very bad idea to wheel-war with ArbCom, and I can honestly say that I would never do so.

For what it's worth, I genuinely don't dislike the ArbCom. I respect the fact that they have to make tough decisions, and I understand that sometimes these decisions must be made in secret. It is true that I have a natural aversion to authority and secrecy; this is part of my character. But in future I will do my best to treat the arbitrators with more respect and to assume good faith on their part.

I served this community for seven months as an administrator, with very little criticism. I believe that I can continue to help Wikipedia by serving as an administrator. I ask you to look at the beneficial contributions I've made to the encyclopedia; I believe that the good I can do outweighs the problems with my somewhat combative nature.

Please give me a second chance. WaltonOne 13:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia newsletter
This newsletter is a monthly newsletter with details relating to events and happenings within the Australian Wikipedian community and WikiProject Australia. If you wish to stop receiving this newsletter, or receive it in a different format, relist your name appropriately at the subscription page. Delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 21:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC).

Hurlstone
The user is obviously a single-purpose account. I've tried to clean-up his/her edits a bit, by removing criticism from the intro, and by removing weasel words and selective quotations. The article needs more positive stuff, though. utcursch | talk 08:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism on my Talk
Following on from that list of accounts and so forth before, two more names and an IP. The accounts are the creatively named "HazBig" and "SmallHaz", both of which have been indefblocked for obvious reasons. There's also the IP 60.230.37.94, which I'll lay odds is the same guy (I've blocked it, but not indefinitely, just in case). I believe these ones are coming from a home computer, so with any luck we might be able to zap him and have done with it. If you could drop me a line on my Talk page when you take care of it, that would be great. What with Christmas coming up, I might forget to check back here. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 13:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately the IP addresses are too spread out to do a rangeblock. Slocking your page is probably more effective. Blocking a single ip isn't going to be useful because it seems his IP changes every day.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket '') 00:32, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * ''Damn. I think I'll keep my page as open as possible for the moment, since I feel that new/unregistered users have the right to ask me questions and so on, although if he keeps it up then I might change my views. So he's definitely changing IPs regularly, or is there one big change from when his school broke for the year? BigHaz - Schreit mich an 00:36, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

RE 1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing
Hi there Fayssal. I've gone through and hopefully improved the article. Regards,  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 09:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Great job Blnguyen. I've done some further copy editing and rearrangement. Please review. -- FayssalF  -  Wiki me up®  18:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm I hope you are going to reconsider your objection.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 08:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, I'm fine with your changes. What else are we looking for?  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 04:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything which can be done further. Everything seems fine and there's no reason to oppose now :) At least there are no more red links as i've just created a stub for Pham Phu Quoc which i'll expand later on today or tomorrow. Thanks for your collaboration. -- FayssalF  -  Wiki me up®  13:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Kafka Liz
Untypically very bad call from you here (B's noticeboard). She has been plugging away at an article I found a couple of days ago & we have had exchanges on the talk-page. She may have picked up the Elonka page from my contributions history - her comment was rather similar to mine. Or by any of a thousand other routes.... But we don't know, do we? I hope you are not falling into top secrit ways. Johnbod (talk) 01:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * A CU was ran! I hope I didn't give the impression that it was purely from cynicism!  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 01:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Aramgar -  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 01:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh well! I take it all back. My lonely search for another medieval iconographer on WP must continue I suppose.... Johnbod (talk) 01:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Agree
I totally agree with what you just did in Empire of Vietnam. And I would like you to do the same thing in every articles about Vietnamese history in Template:History of Vietnam with same reason, removing every Hán tự, don't let any of them in Vietnamese articles. The modern Vietnamese now only care about quốc ngữ. JacquesNguyen (talk) 06:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Oz FTs

 * Are you aiming for a fairy-wren FT???? Hmm, there are three drives going for the first Australian FT then....  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket '') 07:41, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

It'd be a long time before a Fairy-wren FT but I was musing on it. What are the others?cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:43, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Aha. The first is Powderfinger by Giggy, Spebi and Lincalinca. The other one would be Bradman's Invincibles. Time for some shameless advertising... Blnguyen  ( bananabucket '') 07:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh duh. I should have realised....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Sent
I think you know what that means. Acalamari 21:43, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

email
Please see your email. -JodyBtalk 21:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Cobi's RFA
In Cobi's RFA, you !voted oppose due to his low edit count, so I thought I'd let you know that he's added a few hundred edits (albeit most are vandal reverts) since you commented. I don't know if that'll make a difference, I'm still an opposer as well, but I thought you might like to know. Useight (talk) 17:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for supporting my RFA
Just wanted to let you know your recent FA Arrest and assassination of Ngô Đình Diệm showed me someone could be an admin and still write FAs - thanks, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 18:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Moondyne/AU categories
''Did you manage to check all the articles in the cat had the Aus tag that quicklky? Or am I missing something? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:18, 17 December 2007 (UTC)''
 * I'm not sure I follow your question. done and checked only means the section has been checked for false positives.  Category and article tagging is yet to be done, although I can see that User:Euryalus has started on this.  &mdash;Moondyne 07:55, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the star. And well done on the AC election as well. You can put your feet up now...Another thing, you might want to put Military of Sri Lanka‎ on the 1RR list and Talk:Military of Sri Lanka as well. It looks as though there are some doing more than one per day... Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 07:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Noted. -- FayssalF  -  Wiki me up®  16:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Cold Fusion Decision
The practical result of what has been done to the cold fusion article is the public will get misleading information on the current status of cold fusion. Since cold fusion is something that can be a major benefit to the human race, this is a serious error.

I have decided to give up on Wikipedia. PCarbon seems to me to have the patience of a saint. PCarbon has told me that he is also quitting Wikipedia. I will admit that cold fusion is a complex and unique issue. I think that most people who do not have at least a bachelor’s degree in the physical sciences or engineering would have a hard time grasping it. However there are many notable exceptions to this rule.

Pons and Fleishman made their announcement in March of 1989. The announcement was to protect The University of Utah’s patent rights. Some important information like the palladium alloy they used and the length of time it took to get a result (weeks) were not released to protect patent rights. Many scientists understood the significance of the discovery and scientists all over the world began experiments. Pons and Fleishman had been reproducing the experiment for five years and did not expect the difficulty others would have reproducing the experiment. Expectations were raised very high, and when a lot of positive experimental evidence was not appearing, there was a backlash. In the scientific world editors of journals have a lot of power, since scientists must publish or perish. The editor of Nature and other editors decided that cold fusion could not be real, that it was an embarrassment to science and that it needed to be squelched immediately. They also concluded the end justified the means. The used de facto censorship, name calling, and tried to ruin the careers of people who advanced the cold fusion idea. For this reason many of the scientists who continued to work on cold fusion, were retired, had tenure, or worked in another country where the witch hunt was not active.

Even while this political assault was under way, Nature refused to publish a positive result on the grounds that the issue was already decided. Melvin Miles had an initial negative result which he reported to the DOE committee. The DOE committee told the world about this negative result. When Melvin Miles later reported a positive result to the DOE committee, the DOE committee reported the result to no one.

This is how the “consensus” and de facto censorship came about. Cold fusion was done in by the political method, not by the scientific method.

The experiments have gone on for 18 years. Something like 3500 scientific papers by hundreds of scientists with PhDs in physics and chemistry have been written. Since 1992 nuclear transmutations with unnatural isotope ratios have been found. These nuclear transmutations are proof that nuclear reactions are occurring. More heat, tritium, He3, and He4 has been found. Some x-rays, gamma rays, and charged particles have been found. Reproducibility has improved.

Now some comments about Wikipedia. When working on the cold fusion article I have merely tried to include the experimenters’ point of view. I have not tried to censor or delete the skeptics’ point of view. I have tried to create a NPOV article.

I have a problem with some of Wikipedia’s rules and how they are applied. The rules do not show a grasp of the scientific method. Wikipedia has a nest of self appointed scientific censors that do not have a grasp of the scientific method. The scientific method is that experiment is the reality check of science. The only logical proof against experiment is experimental error. Consensus, existing the theory, and expertise can cast doubt on an experiment, but they are not a logical proof that negates experimental evidence. To imply other wise is a use of the political method. Your “undue” weight rule is seriously flawed. It seems to favor consensus over truth and does not give experimental evidence its proper weight. The principal of “information suppression” is well described in the NPOV Tutorial. Wikipedia does nothing to stop “information suppression.” Wikipedia claims that NPOV is its highest principal, but it does not enforce it. Apparently consensus is its highest principal. Truth and facts do not make the list. I do not see how content dispute is not a NPOV dispute. I do not see why “information suppression” is allowed under content dispute. “Content dispute” just seems to be a buzz word for doing nothing. I was told by one of your admins that if Wikipedia had existed in the Middle Ages, it would say the world was flat. If this is true, you should put this statement on your home page as a warning label.

You seem to be overrun with censors who like to throw around words like pseudoscience, pathological science, proto science, and fringe science. These are nonsense words. There only purpose they serve is political name calling. It is not all that complicated. If you are following the scientific method you are practicing science. If you are not following the scientific method you are not practicing science. If you make mistakes while following the scientific method, you are still practicing science.

There are ways that Wikipedia can improve their product. Wikipedia could change its rules to incorporate a sense of the scientific method and give experiment its proper weight They could stop using old censorship to justify new censorship. They could bring their nest of scientific censors under control. They could stop publishing articles on controversial science or new science since they cannot do it competently. They could issue warning labels. They could stop “information suppression”. They could enforce NPOV. They could resolve disputes with people who are scientifically knowledgeable and do not have a censorship passion or axe to grind. However Wikipedia does not seem to be interested in reform. Ron Marshall (talk) 02:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

bananabucket inbox
You have mail. -  Kathryn NicDhàna  ♫ ♦ ♫ 07:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

re. IB
Aye, I'm one of the ones dumb enough to take said plunge :) &mdash; Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 07:33, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Callmebc
I've started a discussion about unblocking Callmebc, per a discussion I've had via email with him. There's a thread here which you, as a blocking admin, might want some input in. --Haemo (talk) 08:54, 21 December 2007 (UTC)