User:BruceGrubb
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have a Masters in Anthropology from NMSU as well as a degree in accounting from DACC. I developed and chaired interactive 90-minute informational/instructional presentation on behalf of NMSU's museum on budget wise computerization for small and medium-sized museums:
- Mountain Plains Museums Annual Meeting (10/05/1995) and
- Museum Association of Arizona Annual Meeting (05/19/1996).
On a more personal level I have little tolerance for edits that use sources that engage in any of the stuff outlined in Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit. The ones that annoy me the most are:
- Ad hominem attacks (like the dreaded "no reputable scholar" or "all respected scholars agree..." comments)
- Argument from "authority" (especially when the authority's comments were made before later developments in the field were made but are being used to cover these later developments)
- Ignoring "Occam's razor"
- Observational selection
- Inconsistency (the source points out there problems with the material but then uses it ignoring the very problems pointed out)
- Non sequitur (position requires ignoring other implications that are common knowledge)
- Excluded middle
- Weasel words
Sources that engage in this kind of nonsense have no place in Wikipedia as they are basically engaging in actions that are forbidden to editors like Neutral point of view, Reliable sources, WP:PRIMARY, Verifiability, and Citing sources. If we as editors can't do this kind of stuff then logically we shouldn't be able to use sources that do it either.
