User talk:Aetheling

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Style and formatting
Manual of Style and its subpages
Related policies and guidelines
Related help, tutorials and proposals
Related to specific cultures

Welcome!

Hello, Aetheling, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Colin°Talk 17:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Stanley Cobb

Thanks for supplying the info on Sidney Cobb. I assume you are related and would be interested in your thoughts on this short article – any mistakes? I've also written articles on Frederic A. Gibbs and William G. Lennox. Cheers, Colin°Talk 17:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

No mistakes so far. I am looking through family archives for a photo. — Aetheling 21:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
How nice to find a family connection here on Wikipedia! A photo would indeed be delightful. -ikkyu2 (talk) 23:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Psychology Wiki

The Logo for the Psychology Wiki.
The Logo for the Psychology Wiki.

Hi Loren,

I've read your brief biography, and thought you might be interested in this project which I am involved in, The Psychology Wiki.

I won't say too much, as I'd like you to judge it for yourself, but you should find that it is different from Wikipedia, because approximately 90% of our contributors so far are professional psychologists, academics, or students and trainees.

Its hosted by a company called Wikia, which was founded by Jimmy Wales and Angela Beesley. There are Google Ads on the site, but we dont make money from the project, they're just to pay for the bandwidth, storage and technical support that Wikia give us.

Have a look and see what you think

Mostly Zen 00:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Mostly Zen. I will drop by from time to time. Aetheling 21:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Ordinal numbers and Category:Cardinal numbers

Please do not add articles to these categories. The articles which you have been adding are totally inappropriate for those categories. Those categories are for the mathematical theories of cardinal and ordinal numbers, not for simple common numbering. Notice that they are part of the set theory category and via that the mathematical logic category. Articles on roads and home furnishing make no sense there. JRSpriggs 06:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

You are right. I had not checked to see the contents of those categories when I added links to those articles. My apologies. — Aetheling 14:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:World population growth rates 1800-2005.png

Thanks for uploading Image:World population growth rates 1800-2005.png. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}. If you have not already done so, please also include the source of the image. In many cases this will be the website where you found it.

Please specify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jusjih 15:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Global warming

Hi Aetheling, I was reading the article on Peak Oil - which is excellent and followed the link to global warming and was very surprised that that article did not refer to peak oil even in passing.

I've added a section with some basic facts effectively inviting readers of global warming to visit peak oil to find out more. I don't know why some of the global warming evangelists are being so upetty about it, but they are giving me hassle. I noticed you were a contributor to the peak oil article, and I am leaving this to ask for some support 88.110.38.52 22:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I tend to agree with the person who observed that Peak Oil will happen too late to make much of a difference with global warming. My best personal estimate for "Peak Fossil Fuel" (the really important date to consider) is 2019, and of course the main benefit (in the sense of reduced carbon emissions) of passing that peak won't be felt for another decade beyond that. This means that the Peak Oil phenomenon is really tangential to global warming. Of course I see no harm in a link, but I also see little harm in not having a link as well. Sorry to be negative! BTW, if I might offer a little advice: I think it would help to register with Wikipedia, since many editors refuse to take unregistered contributors seriously. — Aetheling 04:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wolfowitz

I'm sorry you felt my edit of Paul Wolfowitz was Vandalism, I however do not feel it was. I noticed some other articles on living persons had their commonly used nicknames put with their name and decided to be bold and add it to his. Also I would appreciate it if you would sign your posts on my talk page next time.

  • To add a nickname to a biography of a living person, I recommend adding a complete sentence, like this: "Within the World Bank, Wolfowitz is known as 'The Prez'." Then, if possible, cite a public document in which this nickname is used. That way everyone will understand that this is not simply vandalism. If I might make a further suggestion: your edits will be taken more seriously if you first register with Wikipedia. Your talk page is actually the talk page for an IP address, not for you personally (unless you rent that particular IP address). —Aetheling 23:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why reverted

The numbers you put into economics of new nuclear power plants on return on energy were taken out, solely because they weren't in the cited source. If you have a good source, please put them and the source back in. Simesa 19:50, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Done. I hope my explanation made sense to everyone. —Aetheling 21:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ip removal of content to False Memory Syndrome Foundation

Thanks for your note. I have reviewed the one edit today by the ip mentioned, and your response of a warning. I do not believe there needs to be any further action unless the ip reverts or otherwise vandalises again today - in which case take it to AIV. Thanks for your attention in this matter. LessHeard vanU 22:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disinhibited attachment disorder

Do you think this should be merged with RAD with a redirect as in general both forms get called RAD even if under ICD that's not accurate.

The RAD article is currently being peer reviewed (see top of talkpage) after getting GA, with a view to achieving FAC. Any help gratefully recieved. The peer reviewers said the See Also section should only contain articles not already linked in the text. Personally I like to have them all in one place in See Also, but I suppose it depends on how much one is prepared to compromise for the sake of a gong. 17:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the encouragement! The most difficult thing is that people keep giving me very firm but different instructions on how to do refs but copyediting type work doesn't seem to come naturally to me. I tried to emphasise the ICD a little more by sticking it first when mentioning the two - but most of the research seems to be done in the USA and the proposals seem to revolve around rewriting DSM. Nobody has ever heard of 'DAD'. They just use 'RAD' for both. Regarding getting FAC; I'm assuming that the banned sockmaster who used to control all the articles with his 6 socks will try to reappear at some point and I feel that if the attachment related articles have reached FAC they may be better protected because FAC reviews include reviewing content so in theory it may be less acceptable to corrupt them to promote individual therapies and non-mainstream theories. Its a bit of a learning curve though.Fainites barley 21:23, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

By the way - this is what SandyGeorgia said on See Also's - and she should know ! - "Ideally, the See also section is minimized in an FA-quality article. Items should be worked into the text if relevant, and need not be repeated in See also if they're already in the text." Fainites barley 22:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

There you are look ! [1] I'm also in trouble for not knowing the difference between endashes and hyphens - but my laptop only does one sort of little line. Fainites barley 20:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

To me a mackintosh is something to keep the rain out (though not very well). I only have - or _ . Sometimes the first one comes up shorter than others in what appears to be a random fashion. Fainites barley 07:10, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! If only someone had told me weeks ago. The other thing I can't find is a sort of ;amp thing that people put in instead of ampersands. Fainites barley 16:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] deMause

I have replied to your great input in Talk:Lloyd_deMause.

In that talk page you state:

  • "It seems to me that deMause has contributed ideas to the social sciences in two distinct areas: (a) the frequency and severity of child abuse in European history, and (b) the fantasy-life of nations. The second of these two areas is distinctly speculative and non-scientific, and I have little use or respect for it. The first, on the other hand, contains original and important scientific hypotheses that someday will be verifiable with empirical data."

It seems that we share exactly the same pov about deMause! I also dislike psychoanalysis. In fact, I'm a fan of psychoanalysis' greatest critic, Jeffrey Masson.

Just a minor observation. DeMause didn't publish his seminal monograph in 1978 but in 1974.

Since you are professional matemathician, perhaps you might be interested to add the data you placed in the deMause's talk page into the Journal of Psychohistory article? I already copied and pasted some of the info you provided us to that article's talk page as well as in talk:Psychohistory

Cheers!

—Cesar Tort 22:01, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

suggestion: dont get carried away by your enthusiasm. It will interfere with the proper NPOV expansion of the article. In history, "speculative and non-scientific" is a valid part of the subject. DGG (talk) 01:23, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Psychology project

I went to the Psychology Project on SandyGeorgias advice to ask for someone knowledgable on the subject to run their eye over Reactive attachment disorder before putting it in for FAC. Your name is on the list of actual real live psychologists. Would you mind awfully giving it the once over? Thanks. Fainites barley 15:29, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Journal of Psychohistory

An editor has proposed in talk page to merge the Journal of Psychohistory into main article. Personally, I'd prefer to have two distinct articles. Could you post your opinion in talk:Journal of Psychohistory? Thank you. —Cesar Tort 21:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reactive attachment disorder (again)

Hi. I've put this up for FAC, here [2] According to SandyGeorgia I have to find people to review it. You're the only Psychologist I know! Would you mind awfully adding your twopennorth. Thanks. Fainites barley 22:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I also asked Matisse on SandyGeorgia's advice. Then I went to the list of psychologists at the Project and asked a psychologist called Doczilla. I also left a message at the neuroscience project. The trouble is, even alot of psychologists don't really know that much about attachment, let alone RAD. The Psychology Project seems pretty moribund. I'll go through the list of psychologists and see if any of them have put down Child Development as an interest. Thanks. Fainites barley 08:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments Aethling.Fainites barley 21:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Got the little star! Many thanks for your timely and comprehensive support. Fainites barley 16:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Government of Kerala

Government of Kerala trying to make it to WP:FA, please help. Thanks. --Avinesh Jose  T  05:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review idea

Hi, I have made a proposal that no peer review request be archived without some response. To aid in this, there is a new list of PR requests at least one week old that have had no repsonses beyond a semi-automated peer review. This list is at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog.

There are just over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, so I figure if each of these volunteers reviewed just one or two PR requests without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog (as there have been 2 or 3 such unanswered requests a day on average).

If you would be able to help out with a review or two a month from the "no responses" backlog list that would be great (and much appreciated). Please discuss questions, comments, or ideas at the PR talk page and thanks in advance for your help, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] psychohistory & psychoanalysis

Hi Aetheling, I agree with you. Psychoanalysis is no longer credible. In 2006 I used to edit one of the articles of psychoanalysis' main critics: Jeffrey Masson. I've not edited that article for a while but Masson is in fact one of my personal heroes. Which academic area do you think would be suitable for anyone interested in creating a post- (i.e., non-psychoanalytic) approach to psychohistory? Take a look at the article I'm starting to edit: Infanticide. Regards :) Cesar Tort 05:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Jeffrey Masson is one of my heroes too, though I don't have such a bleak view of psychiatry. I favor an approach to psychohistory from the perspective of modern trauma theory, with a heavy emphasis on (a) the effects of early trauma on the developing brain, especially the amygdala and hippocampus, (b) the effects of such brain damage on the psyches of growing adolescents, (c) the treatment by society of adolescents who act out, or dissociate, or are hyperactive, or any of the other effects of abuse, and (d) the effects on society of having a large fraction of the population grow up with PTSD or some of the other dissociative conditions, and insecure forms of attachment. Many of my ideas are spelled out briefly in this essay: The Persistence of War. — Aetheling (talk) 06:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC).


[edit] Tafl games

Greetings! I would like to request your feedback on the article Tafl games. My goal is to get the article up to WP:GA standards, and I am ready to make the necessary changes to improve the quality of this article. Your thoughts and ideas would be most appreciated! Feel free to post your review on the article's talk page or on my talk page. Thank you for your time. Wilhelm meis (talk) 17:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Peer Review request on Elias Porter page

Hello - I'm new to posting on Wikipedia and have placed a biography of an overlooked (by the history books) psychologist named Elias Porter. I also placed a few references to his work on other pages (and linked there from the new page I created.) Your bio in the peer reviewer area seemed like a good fit and I would be honored if you could give me at least a cursory review. Tscud (talk) 04:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Good morning. Thank-you for taking a look and making a few edits. I created a user/talk page, since the Elias Porter page is the only new article I am working on right now, feel free to use my page for any advice or feedback you may have. Tscud (talk) 14:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review request

Hi. I notice your name on the list of volunteers for social science issues. Would you be able to review Indigenous people of the Everglades region? I am aiming for FA, and I would appreciate any assistance you could give. Thank you. --Moni3 (talk) 18:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Ecuador

Hi Aetheling. You listed yourself at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ecuador#Participants and I thought that you might be interested in recent developments at WikiProject Ecuador. The WikiProject Ecuador banner recently was updated with a number of new parameters and most of the Ecuador article talk pages have been tagged with the banner. Please consider helping out with WikiProject Ecuador. Thanks! GregManninLB (talk) 15:02, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Peer Review help

Thank you for you work as a peer review volunteer. Since March, there has been a concerted effort to make sure all peer review requests get some response. Requests that have gone three days or longer without a substantial response are listed at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog. I have three requests to help this continue.

1) If you are asked to do a peer review, please ask the person who made the request to also do a review, preferably of a request that has not yet had feedback. This is fairly simple, but helps. For example when I review requests on the backlog list, I close with Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, ...

2) While there are several people who help with the backlog, lately I have been doing up to 3 or 4 peer reviews a day and can not keep this up much longer. We need help. Since there are now well over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, if each volunteer reviewed just one PR request without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog. To help spread out the load, I suggest those willing pick a day of the month and do a review that day (for example, my first edit was on the 8th, so I could pick the 8th). Please pick a peer review request with no responses yet, if possible off the backlog list. If you want, leave a note on my talk page as to which day you picked and I will remind you each month.

3) I have made some proposals to add some limits to peer review requests at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review#Proposed_limits. The idea is to prevent any one user from overly burdening the process. These seem fairly reasonable (one PR request per editor per day, only four total PR requests per editor at a time, PR requests with cleanup banners can be delisted (like GAN quick fail), and wait two weeks to relist a PR request after it is archived), but have gotten no feedback in one week. If you have any thoughts on these, please weigh in.

Thanks again for your help and in advance for any assistance with the backlog. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:22, 27 May 2008 (UTC)