User talk:Piechjo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You can add your message here :) Hello Piechjo, I just read what you wrote in your user page. I'm looking for people who might want to collaborate with me on a project that I've started working on. It's to design a handheld computer that is especially designed for dyslexic kids. I've got a dyslexic child. Anyway, I could go on and on, but I'll stop here. If you think you might be interested, visit the wiki pages I've started about the project at Dyslexia handheld computer. Ciao Patty Scheel 14:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Proposed navigation box for dyslexia
Hi, Piechjo.
There is a proposal about creating a navigation tool for the dyslexia article. As you know, we have plans to break the article up into a series of articles. The goal of the navigation box is to assist users in moving from one topic to another easily, and to suggest a brief list of topic areas (not necessarily individual topics) that are related.
I would very much like to get your feedback on the template before it is implemented.
Takt a look at the Dyslexia talk page, then scroll nearly to the bottom of the page for information and links to the strawmen I've put out for review and discussion.
Best,
Rosmoran 12:42, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Your comment on the strawman discussion
Hi, Piechjo.
Thank you for pointing out your comments. For some reason my watchlist isn't showing me all of the changes on my personal pages, so I sometimes miss messages.
I'll make the change per your suggestion --- it's a good one.
Take care,
Rosmoran 17:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Help with dyslexia art
Hi Piechjo. I want to help out with the dyslexia article. I'll send you an email. Cheers Spoctacle 11:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Drenth, Levelt and Hollander
In regards to your edit [1]. I agree that we need to some text out but I think text you cut out may have been relevant. Hollander was writing in response to Drenth and Levelt. Neither are published in magazines (not peer-reviewed scientific journals). Perhaps the views of Hollander should have just been reduce in length? ----Action potential t c 23:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] your question about scientology
Do you read German? There is a very detailed discussion here -- it seems to also include discussion of Davis as compared to Rudolf Steiner as well, but I have to confess that I do not read German so I'm stuck relying on translation tools which totally garble the text. Anyway here is the web site: http://www.siriusonline.de/verlag/zeitschriften.nsf/0/5AD01CE0D75F8C71C1256A720021E00E?OpenDocument
The gist seems to be - Davis took some Scientology courses at some point in an attempt to resolve his own dyslexia; the courses didn't work; he disassociated himself from scientology -- they added him to their enemies list along with everyone else they don't like (maybe because he said bad things about them? I don't know -- I'm hoping you are better able to read that article.
The clay modeling is something Davis used in childhood -- see: http://www.dyslexia.com/library/red-dirt.htm
Armarshall 09:24, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Replied on my page
Wanted to make sure you saw that I replied on my page; absolutely no, I wasn't referring to you :-) It's been a long day here :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Neuro-linguistic programming
I see that you reverted my change to Neuro-linguistic programming, adding it back into the Pseudoscience category from which I had previously removed it. My edit was intended to clean up the category page by removing entries that were already included in a more specific subcategory, in line with this guideline which I encourage you to read and interpret for yourself. If you feel that Neuro-linguistic programming is an exceptional case as per WP:SUBCAT then (barring any contrary input from other editors) I'll abide by your decision for now. Otherwise, I would like to remove the extra category so that things can be kept tidier and the category is easier to navigate. Thanks, --Sapphic (talk) 21:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- From User_talk:Sapphic
- Yes, I see your point. I guess that also means all New Age has to be pseudoscience. I'm not 100 % sure it's true, but personally I have nothing against thi idea, and if this is the Wikipedia categorising/linking policy, let's keep it that way. Sorry about the inconvenience ;) Piechjo (talk) 10:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- There is a lot of debate around the Pseudoscience and Pseuodscientists categories, and I generally try to limit my involvement to just keeping the categories clean and under one page (otherwise they're very difficult to navigate) — however, I agree that not everything in the New Age category is necessarily pseudoscience. The place to make that argument (if you're interested) is on the talk page for the New Age category where you could argue against including the entire category as a subcategory of the pseudoscience category. There is also a clause in WP:SUBCAT under "Reasons for duplication" that might be relevant:
-
-
- 4. There might be articles that belong in a subcategory, while not belonging in a parent category; without duplication, users might assume that all articles in the subcategory belong in the parent category, when this may not actually be the case.
-
-
- So, it might make more sense to explicitly list each (purportedly) pseudo-scientific member of the New Age category under the pseudoscience category, although again I think that would probably best be argued at the talk page for the New Age category since I'm sure some editors would argue that all members of the New Age category do indeed belong under the pseudoscience category.