Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Parapsychology/Archive 3

Mathematically valid clairvoyance/precognition test
I've created an online experiment that utilizes zener cards to test for clairvoyance/precognition in a statistically meaningful manner. In order to acquire meaningful results I need a large number of participants. Can you help me spread the word and advise me on how I can use wikipedia to get the word out? Let me know your thoughts. Thank you. -Scotopia 10:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Pages needing attention
For organization, the pages needing attention needs to be divided up into the really bad (pages needing attention), the short (stubs), and the ones that aren't that bad (others). --Premiumcoffee 05:04, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Assesments
NealParr, where can I find the page of instructions that you created on how to do assessments? -- Annalisa Ventola (Talk 20:25, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Annalisa. You can find it on the WikiProject Parapsychology/Assessment page. I added instructions there. Let me know if they aren't clear or needs work. In the table is judging criteria for the articles, but since the top tiers are by nomination only, it's basically tagging articles as stubs, starts, or B-rated articles. -- Nealparr  (talk to me) 01:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. These instructions are great.  Very clear and to the point.  I think I can do this now ;-) -- Annalisa Ventola  (Talk 05:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Defining 'parapsychologist'
I just did some major pruning of Category:Parapsychologists. There were a number of psychics, psychic surgeons, and paranormal researchers inaccurately being defined as parapsychologists. However, the exercise made me think about how we define 'parapsychologist' in general, or how it should be defined for our purposes at Wikipedia. Here's my working definition for now:
 * a parapsychologist is a person who does (or has done) research on parapsychological topics and publishes that research in peer-reviewed journals

Thoughts? -- Annalisa Ventola (Talk 05:16, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * That's good for part of it. I'm guessing it would leave out historical figures however.  If you had the same definition of "scientist" it would leave out Aristotle and Newton. —— Martinphi (Talk Ψ Contribs) 21:42, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I think people like Harry Price should probably be in there. I don't think a category is something we can make too narrow.  That's because it is supposed to be useful to the reader, but it does not define parapsychology.  If a few toads get in there, it isn't going to hurt the frogs. I don't know how to narrow it down, however. —— Martinphi (Talk Ψ Contribs)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinphi (talk • contribs) 21:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right. Harry Price should be in there.  I'm not sure what I was thinking. -- Annalisa Ventola  (Talk 22:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If you just remove 'publishes research in peer-reviewed journels', it would be too broad. But as it is, it is too narrow. What to do...(sorry I'm not good with this) brickdude  ^  _  ^  07:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Parapsychology made FA status
Parapsychology has received Featured article status. Congrats to everyone who participated! -- Nealparr  (talk to me) 23:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Reincarnation research
The Reincarnation research, which was previously a Good article, lost it's good article status if anyone wants to participate in getting it back. -- Nealparr  (talk to me) 23:19, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm on it. brickdude  ^  _  ^  07:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Parapsychology FA dispute
As you might expect, there is now a dispute on the Featured articles page over whether parapsychology is part of psychology or part of Religion, mysticism and mythology- in other words (in all reality), there is a dispute over whether it is to be given the status of science. Your opinions would be welcome. —— Martinphi (Talk Ψ Contribs) 21:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I beleive that it is a science, and should be treated as a science, so I would figure it a subdivision of psychology. It is, after all, taught as part of that course in some colleges, and sometimes is even it's own subject. brickdude  ^  _  ^  07:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah. We worked it out in the end. —— Martinphi    ☎ Ψ Φ —— 08:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Assessment Banner Icon
I've been placing WP:PSI assessment banners on articles on the watchlist. (Don't get too excited, I didn't get very far). I noticed that our project icon on those banners looks exactly like the icon for WikiProject Psychology. Could somebody update the templates with the groovy version of the psi symbol that is found on our user boxes? I don't know how. -- Annalisa Ventola (Talk 04:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

The Martinphi-ScienceApologist Interview
''What is the role of science in producing authoritative knowledge? How should Wikipedia report on pseudoscience?'' Veterans of numerous edit wars and talk page battles spanning dozens of articles across Wikipedia, User:Martinphi and User:ScienceApologist will go head to head on the subject of Wikipedia, Science, and Pseudoscience in a groundbreaking interview to be published in an upcoming issue of Signpost. User:Zvika will moderate the discussion. Post suggested topics and questions at The Martinphi-ScienceApologist Interview page. 66.30.77.62 (talk) 18:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Chip Coffey
Interested parties might want to look at this AfD —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonm223 (talk • contribs)


 * Not sure why he's stubbed as a parapsychological topic as he's just a TV psychic, ie. not related. -- Nealparr  (talk to me) 00:07, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 03:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Parapsychology articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Parapsychology articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (&diams;) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:27, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Merge of Tarot Cards
I will shortly be merging the tarot cards into their suits and I am trying to contact the interested parties for comment.Tetron76 (talk) 12:42, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Elizabeth Rauscher
There is a newish page on Elizabeth Rauscher and I was wandering if we should add her to the Category:Parapsychologists and add a project template to her talk page. The page is subject to some slightly tricky arguing on the talk page (and one should perhaps look there first before doing anything) and it looks to me like some help from those working on this project may help. Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 20:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC))

Proposed MOS for Religion
There is now a proposed general Manual of Style for Religion and other articles relating to ethoses or belief systems at WikiProject Religion/Manual of style. Any input would be welcome. I personally believe at least one of the reasons why many articles in this field have been as contentious as they have been is because of lack of such guidelines, and would very much welcome any input from others to help come up with some generally acceptable solutions to some of these problems. John Carter (talk) 22:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Award
We need an award (or two(or three (or more))) for this WikiProject!-- Thus Spake   Lee Tru.  14:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I have proposed to merge this wikiproject and 12 others to a new wikiproject. Please see the proposal. IRWolfie- (talk) 19:41, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Guerrilla Skepticism on Wikipedia
I am by no means advocating an adoption of the methods that this video details, but here is a an interesting description of how a group of self-described skeptics have organized themselves: http://skeptv.net/post/50535883267/jref-workshop-guerrilla-skepticism-on-wikipedia-activist. Enjoy! Annalisa Ventola (Talk 02:13, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Also of interest: http://guerrillaskepticismonwikipedia.blogspot.com/ Annalisa Ventola  (Talk 02:26, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes it is interesting. But of no relevance here. IRWolfie- (talk) 10:12, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Back?
Recent edit warring at the Rupert Sheldrake has inspired my recent return to Wikipedia - though its likely temporary. While I'm here, I would love to help jumpstart this project - if there are like-minded folks still around and interested. Annalisa Ventola (Talk 03:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure I'm interested in the topic area. Please note the merger suggestion above, IRWolfie- (talk) 14:25, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I would not support a merger at this time. And if you are going to make changes to the project page, would you care to sign the participant list? Expert editors is an important reference for some people here so instead of deleting this contribution, perhaps it would be more helpful to find a proper place for it?  Annalisa Ventola  (Talk 14:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * That essay has no particular relevance here, and is an essay. It is also neither a policy nor a guideline, IRWolfie- (talk) 20:12, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It is relevant to academic-participants, though I agree with the miscategorization. Hopefully my update addresses this adequately.  Annalisa Ventola  (Talk 01:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Parapsychologists are not necessarily recognised experts so it does not apply. IRWolfie- (talk) 10:15, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Death-warning article
I'm tempted to recommend the article for deletion. Most of it reads like original research, and I'm not convinced that it's a notable concept. Thoughts? Annalisa Ventola (Talk 23:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

JASPR redirect
The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research redirects to the Parapsychological Association. The PA has never had anything to do with this publication. A more appropriate redirect would be to the American Society for Psychical Research. Could someone else fix this? I'd do this quick minor edit myself, but then I'd have to spend another half hour dealing with my new Wikipedia Hound. Thanks in advance. Annalisa Ventola (Talk 04:14, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * All I've asked is that you take care about directly editing an article where you have a COI, in particular noting your COI when you make a proposal related to the Org. I'm not being unreasonable, IRWolfie- (talk) 09:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I have been editing Wikipedia since 2006 and have held my position at the PA for almost as long. The only edit I have made to that page was to change the outdated name of the president - and that's because I have been aware of Wikipedia's policies on COI for quite some time. This was a minor edit and well within of what is acceptable for me to contribute. You slapping a banner on the talk page with my name was an attempt at public shaming, and until you take it down, we're not going to get along.


 * Furthermore, I have not made any proposals about my organization's page, nor do I plan to. I know better than that and I have for a long time.  The fact that you are assuming that I will be making proposals for the Parapsychological Association is an assumption of bad faith on your part.  Stop hounding me and stop trying to game me please. Enough.  Annalisa Ventola  (Talk 13:09, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Notice of RfC: Rupert Sheldrake
Please consider commenting here, if you're previously uninvolved. David in DC (talk) 13:40, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!


Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

This project now has article alerts
See here: WikiProject Parapsychology/Article alerts. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 11:56, 22 April 2015 (UTC)