User talk:Konanen
Question for any administrator available
[edit]Thisrequest for help from administratorshas been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please replace the code{{admin help-helped}}on this page with{{admin help}},or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
No idea, whether I am doing this correctly, but I have a problem withItalian phonology,because, and I don't know how this happened, it has headings, which say "6-10 months", "18 months", "12 months", etc. And I cannot find the edit thereto, otherwise maybe I would have reverted it. Could somebody look into that weird thing? Much appreciated,
-Konanen(talk)16:24, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
- I think those headings are intended to be there. That section explains the ages at which an Italian child begins to use the different sounds.JohnCD(talk)16:59, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
- Cool beans, thank you! -Konanen(talk)17:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Welcome!
[edit]Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.
The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.
The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.
- Don't be afraid to edit!Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
- It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
- If an edit you make is reverted, you candiscuss the issue at the article's talk page.Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there isconsensus.
- Always useedit summariesto explain your changes.
- When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to areliable source.
- If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read ourconflict of interest guideand disclose your connection.
- Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.
Happy editing! Cheers,Pharaoh of the Wizards(talk)18:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]You have recently edited a page related tocomplementary and alternative medicine,a topic designated ascontentious.This is a brief introduction to contentious topics anddoesnotimply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to ascontentious topics.These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should editcarefullyandconstructively,refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topicsproceduresyou may ask them at thearbitration clerks' noticeboardor you may learn more about this contentious topichere.You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the{{Ctopics/aware}}template.tgeorgescu(talk)19:58, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]You have recently edited a page related topseudoscienceandfringe science,a topic designated ascontentious.This is a brief introduction to contentious topics anddoesnotimply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to ascontentious topics.These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should editcarefullyandconstructively,refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topicsproceduresyou may ask them at thearbitration clerks' noticeboardor you may learn more about this contentious topichere.You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the{{Ctopics/aware}}template.tgeorgescu(talk)19:58, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Yes. Wearebiased.
[edit]Jimmy Wales,founder of Wikipedia, once wrote:[1][2][3][4]
Wikipedia's policies... are exactly spot-on and correct. If you can get your work published in respectable scientific journals – that is to say, if you can produce evidence through replicable scientific experiments, then Wikipedia will cover it appropriately.
What we won't do is pretend that the work oflunatic charlatansis the equivalent of "true scientific discourse". It isn't.
So yes, wearebiased.
- We are biased towardsscience,and biased againstpseudoscience.
- We are biased towardsastronomy,and biased againstastrology.[5]
- We are biased towardschemistry,and biased againstalchemy.[6]
- We are biased towardsmathematics,and biased againstnumerology.[7]
- We are biased towardsmedicine,and biased againsthomeopathy.[8]
- We are biased towardsvenipuncture,and biased againstacupuncture.[9]
- We are biased towardssolar energy,and biased againstesoteric energy.[10]
- We are biased towardsactual conspiraciesand biased againstconspiracy theories.[11]
- We are biased towardsvaccination,and biased againstvaccine hesitancy.[12]
- We are biased towardsmagnetic resonance imaging,and biased againstmagnetic therapy.[13]
- We are biased towardscrops,and biased againstcrop circles.[14]
- We are biased towardslaundry detergent,and biased againstlaundry balls.[15]
- We are biased towardsaugmentative and alternative communication,and biased againstfacilitated communication.[16]
- We are biased towardswater treatment,and biased againstmagnetic water treatment.
- We are biased towardsmercuryinsaturated calomel electrodes,and biased againstmercuryinquack medicines.[17]
- We are biased towardsblood transfusions,and biased againstblood letting.
- We are biased towardselectromagnetic fields,and biased againstmicrolepton fields.[18]
- We are biased towardsevolutionandan old Earth,and biased againstyoung Earth creationism.[19]
- We are biased towardsHolocaust studies,and biased againstHolocaust denial.[20]
- We are biased towards an (approximately)spherical earth,and biased against aflat earth.[21]
- We are biased towards thesociology of race,and biased againstscientific racism.[22]
- We are biased towards thescientific consensus on climate change,and biased againstglobal warming conspiracy theories.[23]
- We are biased towardsthe existence of Jesusand biased againstthe existence of Santa Claus.[24]
- We are biased towardsgeology,and biased againstflood geology.[25]
- We are biased towards medical treatments that have been proven to be effective indouble-blindclinical trials,and biased against medical treatments that are based uponpreying on the gullible.[26]
- We are biased towardsastronauts and cosmonauts,and biased againstancient astronauts.[27]
- We are biased towardspsychology,and biased againstphrenology.
- We are biased towardsMendelism,and biased againstLysenkoism.
- We are biased towardsOneirology,and biased againstOneiromancy.
And we are not going to change.tgeorgescu(talk)16:32, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- Pleasedo not badger my talk page. Thank you. -Konanen(talk)16:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^Farley, Tim (25 March 2014)."Wikipedia founder responds to pro-alt-med petition; skeptics cheer".Skeptical Software Tools.Archivedfrom the original on 19 October 2021.Retrieved4 November2021.
- ^Hay Newman, Lily (27 March 2014)."Jimmy Wales Gets Real, and Sassy, About Wikipedia's Holistic Healing Coverage".Slate.Archivedfrom the original on 28 March 2014.Retrieved4 November2021.
- ^Gorski, David(24 March 2014)."An excellent response to complaints about medical topics on Wikipedia".ScienceBlogs.Archivedfrom the original on 19 October 2021.Retrieved4 November2021.
- ^Novella, Steven(25 March 2014)."Standards of Evidence – Wikipedia Edition".NeuroLogica Blog.Archivedfrom the original on 20 October 2021.Retrieved4 November2021.
- ^Talk:Astrology/Archive 13#Bias against astrology
- ^Talk:Alchemy/Archive 2#naturalistic bias in article
- ^Talk:Numerology/Archive 1#There's more work to be done
- ^Talk:Homeopathy/Archive 60#Wikipedia Bias
- ^Talk:Acupuncture/Archive 13#Strong Bias towards Skeptic Researchers
- ^Talk:Energy (esotericism)/Archive 1#Bias
- ^Talk:Conspiracy theory/Archive 12#Sequence of sections and bias
- ^Talk:Vaccine hesitancy/Archive 5#Clearly a bias attack article
- ^Talk:Magnet therapy/Archive 1#Contradiction and bias
- ^Talk:Crop circle/Archive 9#Bower and Chorley Bias Destroyed by Mathematician
- ^Talk:Laundry ball/Archives/2017
- ^Talk:Facilitated communication/Archive 1#Comments to the version by DavidWBrooks
- ^Talk:Ayurveda/Archive 15#Suggestion to Shed Biases
- ^Talk:Torsion field (pseudoscience)/Archive 1#stop f**** supressing science with your bias bull****
- ^Talk:Young Earth creationism/Archive 3#Biased Article (part 2)
- ^Talk:Holocaust denial/Archive 12#Blatant bias on this page
- ^Talk:Flat Earth/Archive 7#Disinformation, the EARTH IS FLAT and this can be SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN. This article is not about Flat Earth, it promotes a round earth.
- ^Talk:Scientific racism/Archive 1#THIS is propaganda
- ^Talk:Climate change conspiracy theory/Archive 3#Problems with the article
- ^Talk:Santa Claus/Archive 11#About Santa Claus
- ^Talk:Flood geology/Archive 4#Obvious bias
- ^Talk:Quackery/Archive 1#POV #2
- ^Talk:Ancient astronauts/Archive 4#Pseudoscience
Hello
[edit]Hi there. While I appreciate your recent efforts at NPOVN, I do have something to say...
I haven’t heard of any policies saying that the comments/opinions of a tbanned user have any problems and shouldn’t be quoted or need to be striked out. Currently my name appears in your recent post as+ Dustfreeworld (topic banned).I don’t mind as much that you don’t include my comments as you include others’, but I *do* mind my presence appears as something like “+ Dustfreeworld (topic banned).If you don’t want to include my comments, that’s fine, just don’t mention me at all.
BTW, it would be great if a few words can be added to make it clear that most opposing comments only appear recently (well...after my edit of the article), as I don’t want people to think that I’ve misinterpreted a no-consensus situation as the opposite (as the no-consensus situation only appears later).
Thanks so much. --Dustfreeworld(talk)13:18, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hi! I am very sorry, I didnotmean to imply that your opinion was not worthwhile, but I was not sure if it was countable/considerable given the (very overreacting) tban. I also did not want tohidetheir existence, because you do raise some good points, and they are part of the public record! How would you like me proceed here? -Konanen(talk)14:39, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion
[edit]Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you atWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcementregarding a possible violation of anArbitration Committeedecision. The thread isKonanen.Thank you.Ivanvector(Talk/Edits)13:43, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello again
[edit]@Konanen;thanks for the reply:-) Just in case you haven’t noticed, we have a gadget that can "Strike out usernames that have been blocked"if it has been enabled through Special:Preferences § Gadgets.[1]I don’t think that’s a good idea. There are many alternative ways to indicate the same thing (e.g. User Bob**). In real life, even for someone who was dead or for criminals who committed the most serious crime, we don’t “strike out their names” in news reports. This is not the issue at hand though.
It would be much appreciated if “+ Dustfreeworld (topic banned)“can be changed to “+ Dustfreeworld”, as I’m still around and what it looks like now can be confusing / misunderstood and potentially disparaging. --Dustfreeworld(talk)21:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement topic ban
[edit]The followingtopic bannow applies to you:
You are indefinitely topic banned from Reiki, broadly construed.
You have been sanctioned perthisAE report.
This topic ban is imposed in my capacity as anuninvolved administratorunder the authority of theArbitration Committee's decision atWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Acupuncture#Final decisionand, if applicable, thecontentious topics procedure.This sanction has been recorded in thelog of sanctions.Please readWP:TBANto understand what a topic ban is. If you do not comply with the topic ban, you may beblockedfor an extended period to enforce the ban.
If you wish to appeal the ban, please readthe appeals process.You are free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you.ScottishFinnishRadish(talk)13:45, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello 03
[edit]Hug others by adding {{subst:Hug}} to their talk page with a friendly message.