freenode #wikipedia

2008-01-10 16:10 < Weaselosaurus> I completely agree, viz. above
2008-01-10 16:10 < Weaselosaurus> "depends on what you're looking for"
2008-01-10 16:11 < Weaselosaurus> still, the HDI is useful
2008-01-10 16:11 < yao_ziyuan> i want such a url: it does not contain images, and the text on it should be as little as possible. and it should not be an .org site like blank.org. can anyone give an example?
2008-01-10 16:12 < Scott5114> yao_ziyuan: like a single page or an entire website?
2008-01-10 16:12 < yao_ziyuan> Scott5114: a single web page
2008-01-10 16:12 < yao_ziyuan> Scott5114: better be blank
2008-01-10 16:12 < yao_ziyuan> Scott5114: but not the local about:blank
2008-01-10 16:12 < Aqwis> like this page intentionally left blank but without that text?
2008-01-10 16:13 < Scott5114> I can put something up real quick, I suppose...
2008-01-10 16:13 < yao_ziyuan> Aqwis: yes
2008-01-10 16:13 < Aqwis> ;|
2008-01-10 16:13 < Scott5114> what do you need it for?
2008-01-10 16:13 < yao_ziyuan> blank.org is an example, but it ends with .org
2008-01-10 16:13 < yao_ziyuan> Scott5114: it is a workaround in a project of mine...
2008-01-10 16:14 < Scott5114> well is it going to be hit a lot, or are you just testing something?
2008-01-10 16:15 < yao_ziyuan> ...
2008-01-10 16:15 < yao_ziyuan> Scott5114: you're so sensitive...
2008-01-10 16:15 < yao_ziyuan> Scott5114: not a lot
2008-01-10 16:15 < yao_ziyuan> friend just suggested one
2008-01-10 16:15 < yao_ziyuan> http://www.example.com/
2008-01-10 16:15 < Scott5114> Ah, I suppose that'd work better.
2008-01-10 16:19 < yao_ziyuan> i have finally finished a scheme to make ebooks out of wikipedia
2008-01-10 16:19 < yao_ziyuan> the ebooks are in the form of zipped html files
2008-01-10 16:23 < gwern> Aqwis: he got something like 30 votes in the end from there
2008-01-10 16:23 < gwern> human error theyu said...
2008-01-10 16:26 < yao_ziyuan> an example ebook is: http://zh_wikipedia.googlegroups.com/web/%E6%8E%92%E5%BA%8F%E7%AE%97%E6%B3%95%E7%94%B5%E5%AD%90%E4%B9%A6.zip
2008-01-10 16:28 < Sfan00> yao_ziyuan: Provided you abide by the GFDL whats to stop you ?
2008-01-10 16:28 < Sfan00> ;)
2008-01-10 16:36 < yao_ziyuan> an ebook of this kind is a list of topics
2008-01-10 16:37 < yao_ziyuan> each topic is a single wikipedia article or a single wikipedia article plus all pages that it links to
2008-01-10 16:37 < Doc_glasgow> bishonen: did 'zilla get her toy?
2008-01-10 16:38 < yao_ziyuan> this is grabbed by a firefox extension ScrapBook; i did some necessary modification
2008-01-10 16:38 < Sfan00> OK But bear in mind external links and images might not be GFDL
2008-01-10 16:38 < yao_ziyuan> then it's almost done
2008-01-10 16:38 < Sfan00> Fair Use is meaningless outside wiki
2008-01-10 16:38 < yao_ziyuan> well, ScrapBook can let you limit to wikipedia.org pages only
2008-01-10 16:39 < yao_ziyuan> so if a link is offline available in an ebook,
2008-01-10 16:39 < yao_ziyuan> clicking it will take you to the target page
2008-01-10 16:39 < Wizardman> 30kb!
2008-01-10 16:39 * Wizardman unashamedly brags
2008-01-10 16:39 < yao_ziyuan> but if it is not offline available,
2008-01-10 16:40 < yao_ziyuan> a custom 404 page will be displayed
2008-01-10 16:40 < yao_ziyuan> telling you to "ask your computer-savvy friends how to go to zh.wikipedia.org"
2008-01-10 16:41 < bishonen> Doc_glasgow: yes. appreciated. Bishapod would like one.
2008-01-10 16:41 < Doc_glasgow> ok
2008-01-10 16:41 < Doc_glasgow> done
2008-01-10 16:42 < Weaselosaurus> Is it stupid to put redirects into categories?
2008-01-10 16:42 < bishonen> Doc_glasgow: thank you.
2008-01-10 16:42 < Sfan00> Is ZH chinese?
2008-01-10 16:42 < Doc_glasgow> bishonen: no problem
2008-01-10 16:43 < yao_ziyuan> Sfan00: yes
2008-01-10 16:43 < Weaselosaurus> Mandarin Chinese, I'd say.
2008-01-10 16:43 < yao_ziyuan> no
2008-01-10 16:43 < Sfan00> If so I thought Wikipedia has difficulties with the Bambooo wall ;)
2008-01-10 16:43 < yao_ziyuan> yes
2008-01-10 16:43 < Weaselosaurus> yay
2008-01-10 16:44 < Sfan00> The problem is that Bamboo walls aren't good against determined 'ninjas' ;)
2008-01-10 16:44 * Weaselosaurus speaks fluent Belgian :-P
2008-01-10 16:45 < Weaselosaurus> Not to mention Swiss
2008-01-10 16:45 < yao_ziyuan> i'm looking for an online place to store my project files
2008-01-10 16:45 < Sfan00> Commons?
2008-01-10 16:46 < yao_ziyuan> sf.net requires a manual authorization
2008-01-10 16:46 < yao_ziyuan> archive.org is an option
2008-01-10 16:46 < Sfan00> Was this using Wikipedia conent?
2008-01-10 16:46 < Sfan00> have you asked Meta?
2008-01-10 16:46 < yao_ziyuan> Sfan00: they're files needed to create an ebook
2008-01-10 16:47 < yao_ziyuan> a firefox extension (.xpi)
2008-01-10 16:47 < yao_ziyuan> an html file for the custom 404 page in an ebook
2008-01-10 16:47 < yao_ziyuan> an html file about how to create an ebook
2008-01-10 16:47 < yao_ziyuan> a README.txt which is part of an ebook
2008-01-10 16:52 < yao_ziyuan> well, is it possible to upload some files to wikipedia.org?
2008-01-10 16:52 < yao_ziyuan> a zip file
2008-01-10 16:53 < yao_ziyuan> about 1mb
2008-01-10 16:53 < yao_ziyuan> for creating html/zip ebooks from zh.wikipedia.org
2008-01-10 17:01 < yao_ziyuan> finally i decided not to use any fixed online location
2008-01-10 17:05 < Phoenix-wiki> Can we use nasa and esa images on wikipedia?
2008-01-10 17:06 < yao_ziyuan> would let people google for these files online and verify their md5 values, like
2008-01-10 17:06 < yao_ziyuan> scrapbook-zhwikise-001.xpi MD5: 65641FE39E57805D23927B9EA4987DA5
2008-01-10 17:06 < Scott5114> NASA yes
2008-01-10 17:06 < Scott5114> Not sure about ESA
2008-01-10 17:06 < Scott5114> but if it's part of the U.S. federal government it's public domain.
2008-01-10 17:07 < Phoenix-wiki> ESA = European space agency
2008-01-10 17:07 < Scott5114> ah, okay.
2008-01-10 17:07 < Phoenix-wiki> so it's not not federal gowernment...
2008-01-10 17:07 < Scott5114> You'd have to consult the appropriate EU laws.
2008-01-10 17:07 < NotACow> DEATH TO MULTINATIONAL AGENCIES
2008-01-10 17:07 < Phoenix-wiki> LOL
2008-01-10 17:07 < NotACow> ESA images are copyrighted to the ESA
2008-01-10 17:07 * Phoenix-wiki is European
2008-01-10 17:08 < Phoenix-wiki> being Irish
2008-01-10 17:08 < NotACow> also not all "NASA" images are actually generated by NASA
2008-01-10 17:08 * Ceiling_Cat returns
2008-01-10 17:08 < Ceiling_Cat> Phoenix-wiki - we forgive you ;)
2008-01-10 17:08 < Phoenix-wiki> >:-(
2008-01-10 17:08 < Ceiling_Cat> (sorry, couldn't resist)
2008-01-10 17:08 < NotACow> NASA hosts a good dela of content produced by NASA clients, which are lkely to be private nonprofit entities (e.g. JPL, which is a division of Caltech)
2008-01-10 17:09 < NotACow> JPL content is copyrighted to the Trustees of the California Institute of Technology
2008-01-10 17:09 < NotACow> and while they typically give very broad use rights, it's not "free" by wikipedia standards
2008-01-10 17:12 < NotACow> don't fall for the trap of "it's on nasa's site, therefore it's public domain"
2008-01-10 17:13 < VoxRationis> there are a lot of images on NASA image of the day which are "credit:NASA/JPL". IotD says "public domain unless logo or says "copyright". therefore, the JPL images which dont say "copyright" are PD
2008-01-10 17:17 < NotACow> VoxRationis: no, the JPL images that don't say copyright MAY be PD
2008-01-10 17:17 < NotACow> they might also be mislabeled.
2008-01-10 17:19 < NotACow> my comptuer just blooped.
2008-01-10 17:19 < NotACow> bloop bloop
2008-01-10 17:20 < VoxRationis> NotACow: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/policy/index.cfm
2008-01-10 17:21 < cctoide> [[Buzzword]]
2008-01-10 17:21 < cctoide> Wow.
2008-01-10 17:24 < ffm> we need to increase our [[synergy]] between departments to develop an [[immersing]] [[framework]] to [[empower]] our people to be [[proactive]] about the [[paradigm shift]]
2008-01-10 17:27 < yannf> hello, i am looking for a British politician called H. W. Emerson (1931)
2008-01-10 17:27 < yannf> any idea who is he?
2008-01-10 17:28 < ffm> yannf: that is what the 'pedia is fore
2008-01-10 17:28 < ffm> *for
2008-01-10 17:28 < yannf> he is not mentioned in wp
2008-01-10 17:28 < ffm> then why do you ask us?
2008-01-10 17:28 < NotACow> yannf: he must not exist, then
2008-01-10 17:28 < Krator> [[WP:RD]]
2008-01-10 17:28 < yannf> or at least, i don't where
2008-01-10 17:29 < NotACow> yannf: really odd of him to hve a number in parentheses for a last name like that
2008-01-10 17:29 < yannf> http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Chronology_of_Mahatma_Gandhi%27s_life/India_1931
2008-01-10 17:29 < yannf> Gandhi met H. W. Emerson, Home Secretary
2008-01-10 17:29 < yannf> there is probably an error
2008-01-10 17:30 < yannf> the H.S. was not H. W. Emerson at that time
2008-01-10 17:31 < ffm> being part of a group of encyclopedia writers, I for one tend to be a bit RTFWP
2008-01-10 17:32 < yannf> H.S. was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Robert_Clynes
2008-01-10 17:33 < yannf> may be the name is also wrong
2008-01-10 17:35 < yannf> Mr. H. W. Emerson, Indian Civil Service
2008-01-10 17:35 < ffm> yannf: why do you want to know?
2008-01-10 17:35 < Krator> ffm: probably a bad question to ask to any Wikipedia reader :)
2008-01-10 17:35 * Krator has been reading random articles randomly too much
2008-01-10 17:36 < yannf> ok, here is he: H. W. EMERSON, Under Secretary to the Government of India
2008-01-10 17:38 < yannf> but no WP article for him
2008-01-10 17:39 < ffm> yannf: read [[WP:NOTE]], and if he meets it, and there are no [[WP:COI]], go for it.
2008-01-10 17:43 < Paine> someone please explain to me how it's possible to steal a 200 tonne bridge overnight without anyone noticing? http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_2672138.html
2008-01-10 17:44 < morwen> Paine: official corruption
2008-01-10 17:45 * Mike_H pets fanny
2008-01-10 17:45 < Mike_H> er
2008-01-10 17:45 * Mike_H pets yannf
2008-01-10 17:45 < Sceptre> what the hell is happening on Wikiquote?
2008-01-10 17:45 < ffm> Sceptre: you tell us?
2008-01-10 17:46 < Sceptre> There's some stupid blinding-green sentence in article histories
2008-01-10 17:46 < ffm> link...
2008-01-10 17:47 < Sceptre> http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Futurama&action=history
2008-01-10 17:47 < Sceptre> it says "updated since my last visit"
2008-01-10 17:48 < The359> sounds self explanitory
2008-01-10 17:49 * Ceiling_Cat watches Mike's heavy petting
2008-01-10 17:51 < Ceiling_Cat> Evil_Monkey !
2008-01-10 17:54 < NotACow> heh
2008-01-10 17:54 < NotACow> "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. There is a community of people, known as Wikipedians, who are striving to write that encyclopedia. Apparently, not everyone who has an editor's account on Wikipedia is a Wikipedian."
2008-01-10 17:55 < placebo_effect> its not?
2008-01-10 17:55 < Messedrocker> no, because a wikipedian strives to improve the encyclopedia
2008-01-10 17:55 < Messedrocker> and not everyone with an account on wikipedia is that way
2008-01-10 17:56 < Ceiling_Cat> Messedrocker - like the 100+ scibaby socks I blocked this morning
2008-01-10 17:57 < Evil_Monkey> Ceiling_Cat: howdy
2008-01-10 17:57 * Evil_Monkey begins the fun task of updating many pages for the death of Edmund Hillary
2008-01-10 17:57 < Ceiling_Cat> oh snap
2008-01-10 17:57 < Ceiling_Cat> I didn't realize he died
2008-01-10 17:57 < Messedrocker> give credit to the US government
2008-01-10 17:58 < Messedrocker> they load the internet to the brim with information
2008-01-10 17:58 < Messedrocker> public domain information, too
2008-01-10 17:58 < Luna-San> "not everyone who has an editor's account" as opposed to some other kind of account?
2008-01-10 17:58 < Sfan00> What is a scibaby sock?
2008-01-10 17:58 < Evil_Monkey> Ceiling_Cat: appears it was sometime this morning (NZ time), so in the last couple of hours
2008-01-10 17:58 < Ceiling_Cat> Sfan00 - Scibaby is a sockpuppeteer
2008-01-10 17:58 < Ceiling_Cat> and a fairly prolific one
2008-01-10 17:58 < Evil_Monkey> I'm sure there will be much gushing on the news
2008-01-10 17:59 < Ceiling_Cat> a scibaby sock is a sockpuppet account Scibaby has registered
2008-01-10 17:59 < Sfan00> Celing_cat: Hey no puppet shows without permit then? ;)
2008-01-10 17:59 < Sfan00> Even if the entertainment value is laughable ;)
2008-01-10 17:59 < Ceiling_Cat> Sfan00 - frankly, I wouldn't give a damn about it except that he uses them for POV pushing
2008-01-10 17:59 < Ceiling_Cat> trying to water down our article on global warming
2008-01-10 17:59 < Ceiling_Cat> and the fucker is very persistent
2008-01-10 17:59 < Evil_Monkey> guess the death isn't ITN worthy --- not that unexpected since he was 88 and in failing health
2008-01-10 18:00 < Ceiling_Cat> ok, time to go
2008-01-10 18:00 * Ceiling_Cat waves
2008-01-10 18:05 < Evil_Monkey> wow - cnn.com even have Hillary
2008-01-10 18:05 < Evil_Monkey> Hillary's death as breaking news. I thought they only reserved that for really important people like Anna Nicole Smith
2008-01-10 18:06 < Rinn> Or Jesus.
2008-01-10 18:06 < nazgjunk> ...gods
2008-01-10 18:07 < nazgjunk> I read that as hillary clinton
2008-01-10 18:07 < nazgjunk> >.>
2008-01-10 18:07 < The359> me too
2008-01-10 18:08 < nazgjunk> (by the by, hillary is an awesome name for the first dude to climb that rock)
2008-01-10 18:08 < nazgjunk> but i'm probably not the first one to notice
2008-01-10 18:12 < The359> Not as good as Sue
2008-01-10 18:14 < CakeProphet_> :o
2008-01-10 18:14 < CakeProphet_> who am I?
2008-01-10 18:14 < CakeProphet_> why am I here?
2008-01-10 18:14 < CakeProphet_> is there a God?
2008-01-10 18:14 < The359> Yes
2008-01-10 18:14 < Rinn> Another seeder showed up!
2008-01-10 18:14 < The359> Bow down
2008-01-10 18:14 < Evil_Monkey> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edmund_Hillary&diff=prev&oldid=183507308
2008-01-10 18:14 < CakeProphet_> what is life?
2008-01-10 18:14 < CakeProphet_> is there a meaning to it all?
2008-01-10 18:14 < Rinn> Now it occasionally goes above 1 KB/s for a few seconds and then goes back down.
2008-01-10 18:14 < Evil_Monkey> do people have no concept of time zones or something?
2008-01-10 18:14 < CakeProphet_> Evil_Monkey, What? Future people?
2008-01-10 18:15 < CakeProphet_> don't confuse me
2008-01-10 18:15 < Rinn> Life is the absence of death!
2008-01-10 18:15 < CakeProphet_> with your time-location-shifting juju magic.
2008-01-10 18:15 < Evil_Monkey> For most of the people in the world it is the 11th
2008-01-10 18:15 < CakeProphet_> nope.
2008-01-10 18:15 < The359> lies
2008-01-10 18:16 < CakeProphet_> most of the world doesn't matter.
2008-01-10 18:16 < CakeProphet_> ...damn underscores.
2008-01-10 18:17 < CakeProphet_> ...whut? my name is apparently already being used?
2008-01-10 18:17 < The359> Ghost it
2008-01-10 18:17 < CakeProphet_> done and done
2008-01-10 18:22 < Dtobias> Life? It's a magazine, a cereal, a board game, and a TV series.
2008-01-10 18:22 < The359> Movie too
2008-01-10 18:28 < Nathyn> Any admins here?
2008-01-10 18:28 < Rinn> And a book.
2008-01-10 18:28 < Mike_H> Rinn: I need a styptic pencil :(
2008-01-10 18:28 < Rinn> And a manga, and a racing team, and an acronym.
2008-01-10 18:28 < Nathyn> Don't worry -- not a troll here, I promise. It's an issue of an admin abusing their policy -- even wheel-warring over it.
2008-01-10 18:28 < Nathyn> Abusing their policy? I meant to say abusing their power. Heh.
2008-01-10 18:29 < The359> Racing team and engine constructor, at that
2008-01-10 18:29 < Rinn> Also a whole bunch of songs.
2008-01-10 18:30 < Mike_H> But not a styptic pencil :(
2008-01-10 18:30 * The359 remembers the Life W12
2008-01-10 18:30 < Lycurgus> what is "wheel-warring"?
2008-01-10 18:31 < Rinn> When the person in the passenger seat leans over and starts grabbing the wheel.
2008-01-10 18:31 < The359> Back seat driving, Lycurgus
2008-01-10 18:31 < Lycurgus> ah
2008-01-10 18:31 < Evil_Monkey> "A wheel war is a struggle between two or more administrators in which they undo another's administrative actions — specifically, unblocking and reblocking a user; undeleting and redeleting; or unprotecting and reprotecting a page."
2008-01-10 18:32 < nazgjunk> highly annoying for said user, one might imagine
2008-01-10 18:32 < The359> Wouldn't that involve two Admins then?
2008-01-10 18:32 < The359> breaking rules
2008-01-10 18:32 < Nathyn> I suppose.
2008-01-10 18:33 < Nathyn> Another admin unblocked me within minutes of being blocked because of the clear abuse of power. The original admin who blocked me appeared to have retaliated by blocking me again.
2008-01-10 18:34 < Rinn> Heeheehee
2008-01-10 18:34 < Nathyn> I plan to write up an ArbCom case when the block is over -- rest assured they'll be banned. I was accused of "edit-warring," but I received only 1 warning. The article I was editing was trolled by vandals.
2008-01-10 18:35 < Nathyn> I requested that the article be semi-protected -- it was initially rejected on superious reasoning (that's a side issue). So, every time the trolls injected FRINGE, I reverted, citing the specific policy, noting it on their talkpages, and linking to it in my summaries.
2008-01-10 18:35 < Lycurgus> spurious
2008-01-10 18:35 < The359> Side issue?
2008-01-10 18:35 < Nathyn> Actually, I admit it's likely ArbCom might say the original request for page-protection was unnecessary.
2008-01-10 18:36 < Nathyn> That was a side-issue. Let me go on, however.
2008-01-10 18:36 < Lycurgus> and on and on
2008-01-10 18:36 < The359> if you're taking it to ArbCom, why are you telling us exactly?
2008-01-10 18:36 < Nathyn> I dealt with literally about 5 or 6 editors who each injected the fringe POV into the article -- I noted quite clearly why they were violating policy (nearly every one was an SPA and those that weren't were suggestive of it).
2008-01-10 18:37 < Evil_Monkey> is there an MOS item on including the time of an event in other time zones?
2008-01-10 18:37 < Evil_Monkey> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edmund_Hillary&diff=183511439&oldid=183510901
2008-01-10 18:37 < Nathyn> Hold on:
2008-01-10 18:37 < The359> What article are we discussing here?
2008-01-10 18:37 < The359> and what the hell is SPA?
2008-01-10 18:37 < Nathyn> Austrian Economics.
2008-01-10 18:37 < Nathyn> Single-purpose account.
2008-01-10 18:37 < Lycurgus> AKA sockpuppet
2008-01-10 18:37 < Nathyn> Those that weren't SPAs were highly suggestive of it, through histories of contentious edits.
2008-01-10 18:38 < The359> do you mean [[Austrian School]]?
2008-01-10 18:38 < Nathyn> The articles on Austrian economics have been vandalized through what computer nerds called "security through obscurity."
2008-01-10 18:38 < Nathyn> No, The 359. But if that article is vandalized too -- they ALL are.
2008-01-10 18:38 < The359> ...
2008-01-10 18:38 < The359> I asked you what article
2008-01-10 18:38 < Nathyn> Ah, I see.
2008-01-10 18:38 < Lycurgus> ok, "computer nerd" enable "clueless ole turd"
2008-01-10 18:38 < Nathyn> Perhaps that was a redirect. Let me see.
2008-01-10 18:38 < Lycurgus> s
2008-01-10 18:38 < The359> you said AUstrian Economics, that redirects to Austrian School
2008-01-10 18:39 < Nathyn> Yes -- Austrian school.
2008-01-10 18:39 < Nathyn> Take a look.
2008-01-10 18:39 < Nathyn> I specifically noted to the admin that blocked me that I have defended the "laissez-faire" view in past edits because of POV-pushing on Monetarism on both sides that led to the whole thing being gutted.
2008-01-10 18:40 < Nathyn> He apparently still assumed bad faith.
2008-01-10 18:40 < Nathyn> Now -- as noted, each editor whose edits I reverted -- I specifically noted how they violated policy in the edit summary on their talkpages. Not a one of them discussed the issue with me, though they all kept "trolling" along and editing other articles.
2008-01-10 18:40 < The359> Are you Zenwhat?
2008-01-10 18:41 < Nathyn> That is correct.
2008-01-10 18:41 < Nathyn> Also, if anyone unblocks me -- I don't intend to touch Austrian economics right now, even if anyone puts the POV in again.
2008-01-10 18:42 < The359> I don't know, you seem to be claiming that the entire thing is a psuedoscience with only a single source
2008-01-10 18:42 < Lycurgus> wow somebody who describes themselves as a reactionary
2008-01-10 18:42 < Nathyn> Having a successful ArbCom decision sanction the pseudoscience of the Austrian school and revoke the privileges of Auburn-what's his name is enough.
2008-01-10 18:42 < Nathyn> Me, Lycurgus, or him?
2008-01-10 18:42 < Lycurgus> you
2008-01-10 18:42 < Lycurgus> or Zenwhat
2008-01-10 18:42 < Nathyn> How do I describe myself as a reactionary?
2008-01-10 18:42 < Lycurgus> if you are Zenwhat
2008-01-10 18:42 < Nathyn> IF?
2008-01-10 18:43 < The359> Your first edits to the article involved removing one sourced statement
2008-01-10 18:43 < Nathyn> The359 -- there's a nuance in that, however. The sourced statement is a well-known Austrian economist.
2008-01-10 18:43 < The359> Removing a list of critics, and inserting that it is pseudoscience, even changing the article categories
2008-01-10 18:43 < Lycurgus> "I'm a polemic reactionary and a n00b. But I'm humble. If I say anything ridiculously stupid, call me on it and I'll likely acknowledge it." did you write that?
2008-01-10 18:43 < The359> ok, so?
2008-01-10 18:43 < The359> Alternative views are allowed to remain
2008-01-10 18:43 < The359> 1 well known economist does not trump all others
2008-01-10 18:44 < Nathyn> The359 -- that wasn't my point.
2008-01-10 18:44 < Nathyn> WP:FRINGE says that fringe sources can't be used to establish fringe views. That's what they were doing.
2008-01-10 18:44 < The359> What fringe sources?
2008-01-10 18:44 < Lycurgus> you need to think about your life
2008-01-10 18:44 < Nathyn> ...The Austrian economists, Peter Boettke.
2008-01-10 18:44 < Nathyn> And the other one cited.
2008-01-10 18:44 < The359> And he is called fringe by who?
2008-01-10 18:45 < Lycurgus> who else
2008-01-10 18:45 < Nathyn> This is as I said "security through obscurity." Give me one moment.
2008-01-10 18:45 < Nathyn> Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism#Jewish_bankers_conspiracy_theories_on_Wikipedia._Did_you_know.3F
2008-01-10 18:45 < The359> You seem to be doing more than just removing "fringe sources"
2008-01-10 18:45 < The359> Claiming an entire article is about a pseudoscience seems highly POV
2008-01-10 18:45 < The359> especially with only a lone backing source
2008-01-10 18:46 < Lycurgus> well you are a troll, but I must admit a somewhat endearing one for your honest and sincerity
2008-01-10 18:46 < Nathyn> According to the very articles on Wikipedia, the sources there are pretty reliable.
2008-01-10 18:46 < Nathyn> If I am a troll, then I ought to be blocked.
2008-01-10 18:46 < Nathyn> I do not advocate fringe views or opinions. I believe the Mises Institute is a cult, but I have not attempted to inject *THAT* opinion -- only the views of the mainstream.
2008-01-10 18:47 < The359> If it were mainstream
2008-01-10 18:47 < The359> You'd have more sources
2008-01-10 18:47 < The359> You currently have 1
2008-01-10 18:47 < Nathyn> What do you mean "if"? The so-called "undisputed dean" of Austrian economics being apologetic for Nazism and Fascism in the 1960's isn't enough?
2008-01-10 18:47 < The359> And an a link to a Wikipedia talk page that I do not see how it relates to this Boettke guy
2008-01-10 18:47 < Nathyn> The350 -- all you need is one.
2008-01-10 18:47 < The359> Not for pushing a POV
2008-01-10 18:48 < Nathyn> Hah!
2008-01-10 18:48 < The359> What does a person's beliefs in Nazism and Fascism have to do with this?
2008-01-10 18:48 < Nathyn> We'll let ArbCom decide. I have a copy of my economics textbook. Would it be evidence enough if I show the section "A" in the back, where there ceases to be any mention of Austrian economics or Mises?
2008-01-10 18:48 < The359> We're discussing your believing that Boettke is fringe
2008-01-10 18:48 < Nathyn> Boettke is an Austrian economist.
2008-01-10 18:48 < The359> I don't see Boettke mentioned at all on that talk page
2008-01-10 18:49 < Nathyn> It would be like a person establishing the proof of Marxist concepts as "mainstream" by inserting sources from Marxist economists.
2008-01-10 18:49 < The359> ok, so why did you remove him as a source on the article?
2008-01-10 18:49 < Nathyn> Because tagging the lead with caveats like "allegedly" and "according to guys like Boettke" would make the lead non-NPOV in favor of unjustifiably ATTACKING Austrian economics.
2008-01-10 18:50 < Nathyn> Again, I noted this when I reverted one person who re-included the claim.
2008-01-10 18:50 < Weaselosaurus> is "pronunciation" the prevailing spelling?
2008-01-10 18:50 < The359> Except it didn't say that, Nathyn
2008-01-10 18:50 < Rinn> I think so.
2008-01-10 18:50 < Nathyn> Yes,, Weasel.
2008-01-10 18:50 < Weaselosaurus> o.o the Austrian school
2008-01-10 18:50 < Lycurgus> well at least this is on topic, if tedious
2008-01-10 18:50 < Nathyn> The359, what do you mean?
2008-01-10 18:50 < Weaselosaurus> one of the POV-pusher themes du jour
2008-01-10 18:51 < The359> The words Allegedly and the use of Boettke's name is not used at all in the entire paragraph you removed
2008-01-10 18:51 < Nathyn> Is it just me, or does Wikipedia assume bad faith in the case of people removing content, but blindly and naively assumes good faith in the case of trolls including fringe views?
2008-01-10 18:51 < Nathyn> The359 -- it was a comment I made with regard to a user.
2008-01-10 18:51 < The359> Are you not assuming bad faith in calling them trolls?
2008-01-10 18:51 < Nathyn> I'll dig up the diff. Give me a moment.
2008-01-10 18:51 < The359> Well what does a user matter, we're discussing the content you removed
2008-01-10 18:51 < The359> You removed content that had a source
2008-01-10 18:51 < The359> Why
2008-01-10 18:52 < Nathyn> The359 -- being single-purpose accounts all putting in the same contentious edits without discussing them DEMONSTRATES bad faith.
2008-01-10 18:52 < The359> No, it doesn't
2008-01-10 18:52 < Messedrocker> or it could demonstrate ignorance
2008-01-10 18:52 < Messedrocker> or just being stupid
2008-01-10 18:52 < The359> Or being new
2008-01-10 18:52 < Nathyn> Stupid people > Everybody else?
2008-01-10 18:52 < Nathyn> They weren't new. Several were registered users.
2008-01-10 18:53 < The359> I'll ask you simply one last time - How is Boettke a bad resource that required removal?
2008-01-10 18:53 < Nathyn> And again -- all with edit histories of being supportive of Austrian economics and Market Anarchism.
2008-01-10 18:53 < Lycurgus> stupid: more than 1 std dev below your level of intelligence
2008-01-10 18:53 < The359> What proof is there that hs is a bad source
2008-01-10 18:53 < The359> and by proof, I want something that mentions his name
2008-01-10 18:54 < Nathyn> The359 -- Boettke was a bad source because Boettke is an Austrian economist. Austrian economics is regarded as pseudoscience. This is difficult to source because they aren't discussed in academic journals. The one source of Bryan Caplan calling them pseudoscientists was *also* regularly removed by the fringe pushers.
2008-01-10 18:54 < The359> Regarded as a pseudoscience by 1 source
2008-01-10 18:54 < The359> And even if this is a pseudoscience
2008-01-10 18:54 < Nathyn> "Even if"
2008-01-10 18:54 < Nathyn> Drop it.
2008-01-10 18:54 < Nathyn> Not interested.
2008-01-10 18:55 < Weaselosaurus> Ludwig von Mises had trouble getting a job because of his theories, but Austria fans see in that a great conspiracy to suppress The Truth (tm)
2008-01-10 18:55 < The359> And even if this is a pseudoscience, why would a source for that pseudoscience need removal?
2008-01-10 18:56 < Messedrocker> Ludwig von Koopa?
2008-01-10 18:56 < Weaselosaurus> I wouldn't say it's a pseudoscience, just a profoundly bad idea
2008-01-10 18:56 < The359> If the article is notable enough to be on Wikipedia, why would a source behind this claimed pseudoscience not be allowed?
2008-01-10 18:56 < Weaselosaurus> (POV)
2008-01-10 18:56 < The359> You can enter a claim that it is a pseudoscience, but that doesn't mean you can remove those that do not believe it is a pseudoscience
2008-01-10 18:56 < Lycurgus> intelligent design is the canonical pseudoscience
2008-01-10 18:57 < Nathyn> The359 -- if you are going to engage in McCarthyist witch-hunting about me -- intensely questioning me by assuming I'm guilty until proven innocent -- I'm not going to discuss this with you. You'll just have to wait 'til the ArbCom and I can put forth the diffs, and so on, and you can read this all at once.
2008-01-10 18:57 < The359> How is this witch hunting?
2008-01-10 18:57 < The359> These are simply questions
2008-01-10 18:57 < Nathyn> ...Instead of asking questions like, "Are you or have you ever been a Communist?"
2008-01-10 18:57 < Nathyn> The questions -- they're very loaded.
2008-01-10 18:57 < The359> Bullshit
2008-01-10 18:57 < Nathyn> And suggestive of guilt.
2008-01-10 18:57 < Nathyn> Hah!
2008-01-10 18:57 < The359> You removed a source for no good reason
2008-01-10 18:57 < Weaselosaurus> this isn't about "guilt"
2008-01-10 18:57 < The359> Your edits have been highly POV
2008-01-10 18:58 < Nathyn> I removed a source because it was a fringe source to prove a fringe view.
2008-01-10 18:58 < Weaselosaurus> we're not a county court
2008-01-10 18:58 < The359> And you were blocked for good reason
2008-01-10 18:58 < Nathyn> You can't use an Austrian economist source to demonstrate the mainstream tenability of Austrian economics.
2008-01-10 18:58 < Lycurgus> astrology, psychoanlysis, for some all of the social sciences including economics
2008-01-10 18:58 < Weaselosaurus> Is that what was done?
2008-01-10 18:58 < Nathyn> Feel free to make that argument in ArbCom, when I'm back a day from now. The admin who unblocked me certainly didn't think so.
2008-01-10 18:58 < Weaselosaurus> Or was it some kind of "Supporters argue that..."
2008-01-10 18:58 < Rinn> Arbitrary Committee!
2008-01-10 18:59 < Nathyn> You do seem to be assuming I'm guilty, The359. Furthermore, your hostility didn't seem to emerge until I named the article.
2008-01-10 18:59 < The359> Yes, it's a conspiracy
2008-01-10 18:59 < The359> that's it
2008-01-10 18:59 < Nathyn> A possible reason, perhaps? Probably not. I won't be as rudely suspicious as you.
2008-01-10 18:59 < Weaselosaurus> By mentioning it, you are.
2008-01-10 18:59 < The359> You just did, genius
2008-01-10 18:59 * Rinn giggles
2008-01-10 19:00 < Rinn> I love Wikipedia people.
2008-01-10 19:00 < The359> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Austrian_School&diff=183321854&oldid=183166980 Here Weaselosaurus
2008-01-10 19:00 < Weaselosaurus> It's like saying "I've never insulted a referee and I won't make an exception for this wanker"
2008-01-10 19:00 < Nathyn> <s></s> those above statements, please.
2008-01-10 19:00 < Nathyn> Good points...
2008-01-10 19:00 < Lycurgus> take it easy, if you get banned here, what then?
2008-01-10 19:00 < The359> There were some unsourced claims in the paragraph removed, but also a sourced claim by this Boettke
2008-01-10 19:00 < Nathyn> Lycurgus, I won't get banned.
2008-01-10 19:01 < The359> While Nathan on the other hand removed a list of critics and flat out called the entire concept pseudoscience with a lone source
2008-01-10 19:01 < Nathyn> There's currently a blatant troll by the name of karmaisking who is doing the same stuff the others I dealt with on Austrian economics were doing.
2008-01-10 19:01 < Weaselosaurus> that's the most blatan POV-pushing I've seen in a while.
2008-01-10 19:01 < Weaselosaurus> *t
2008-01-10 19:01 < Nathyn> The policy is: "Bold, revert, discuss." If I'm bold, I revert, then I send you a message and you don't respond but keep editing articles, that doesn't seem to fall under 3RR guidelines since the article was heavily vandalized.
2008-01-10 19:02 < The359> I should point out that the claim of Austrian School being pseudoscience actually has no reference
2008-01-10 19:02 < Weaselosaurus> the influence of the Austrians on Thatcherism is so blatantly obvious that you could get many quotes of hers corroborating it.
2008-01-10 19:02 < The359> The only reference is to an economist calling it a misinterpretation
2008-01-10 19:02 < Nathyn> Actually, it does. "Why I'm not an Austrian Economist" by Bryan Caplna.
2008-01-10 19:02 < Nathyn> The359 -- you seem to be scrambling to find evidence to prove me wrong. Please stop.
2008-01-10 19:02 < The359> Scrambling?
2008-01-10 19:03 < Nathyn> Please let the facts speak for themselves instead of collecting the facts to support a view. See "confirmation bias."
2008-01-10 19:03 < The359> We've been discussing the same things over and over
2008-01-10 19:03 < Nathyn> Yes.
2008-01-10 19:03 * Rinn continues giggling
2008-01-10 19:03 < Weaselosaurus> Nathyn: I've looked at the facts, and you're pushing POVs like there was no tomorrow.
2008-01-10 19:03 < Nathyn> You keep asking me loaded questions while simultaneously making baseless charges, like "You removed a source for no good reason"
2008-01-10 19:03 < The359> No, they are not loaded
2008-01-10 19:03 < The359> Does the article by Caplan actually say it is a pseudoscience?
2008-01-10 19:04 < Nathyn> Christ, man -- the founder of the school was apologetic for Nazis and Fascists in the 60's, you have zero knowledge on the matter, and your entire argument relies on the spurious argument that "just one source" can't prove anything.
2008-01-10 19:04 < The359> So?
2008-01-10 19:04 < Nathyn> Does the Constitution contain the word "freedom"?
2008-01-10 19:04 < Weaselosaurus> Nathyn: Classic ad-hominem. What else?
2008-01-10 19:04 < Weaselosaurus> both on the founder and on 359
2008-01-10 19:05 * Rinn leans on CakeProphet
2008-01-10 19:05 < Nathyn> Weasel: Jimbo has said he's a moderate -- not an apologist for Fascists, Nazis, or a supporter of Anarchism.
2008-01-10 19:05 < Rinn> Jimbo Wales?
2008-01-10 19:05 < Nathyn> He calls the LP "extreme." What the hell does that make the Austrians? Insane. That's what.
2008-01-10 19:05 < The359> wtf does Jimbo have to do with any of this?
2008-01-10 19:05 < Nathyn> Someone said "the founder"?
2008-01-10 19:05 < Weaselosaurus> Wth has that got to do with anything?
2008-01-10 19:05 < Nathyn> ...???
2008-01-10 19:05 < Nathyn> ???
2008-01-10 19:05 < The359> Are you pulling this out of your ass?
2008-01-10 19:05 < Lycurgus> they meant founder of the austrian school maybe
2008-01-10 19:05 < Nathyn> Ah, got it.
2008-01-10 19:06 < Nathyn> That was the confusion.
2008-01-10 19:06 < Weaselosaurus> Notability = Things Jimbo likes?
2008-01-10 19:06 < Nathyn> Weasel -- how is it an ad-hominem?
2008-01-10 19:06 < Rinn> I like cookie dough.
2008-01-10 19:06 < Weaselosaurus> you called him a nazi sympathizer which has zero to do with his economic science prowess.
2008-01-10 19:06 < Rinn> Is there a [[cookie dough]] article?
2008-01-10 19:06 < The359> Nathyn
2008-01-10 19:06 < The359> Looking at the article again
2008-01-10 19:06 < Rinn> Looks like there is.
2008-01-10 19:06 < Lycurgus> <- goes to take a dump or something else more uplifting than this.
2008-01-10 19:07 < The359> Did you not notice that Caplan was already used as a source in a Criticism section
2008-01-10 19:07 < Nathyn> It's not Ad-Hitlerum. I'm not saying, "He was apologetic for Nazis, therefore his economics were wrong." I'm saying, "He was apologetic for Nazis, THEREFORE HE WAS A FRINGE THEORIST."
2008-01-10 19:07 < The359> Before you added a SECOND nearly identical one?
2008-01-10 19:07 < Weaselosaurus> no
2008-01-10 19:07 < Weaselosaurus> because his theories on economics have nothing to do with his political allegiance
2008-01-10 19:07 < Formentar> Rinn: I never quite understood that sentiment - aren't cookies better, just like bread is better than bread dough?
2008-01-10 19:07 < Rinn> The cookie dough article is in severe need of expansion.
2008-01-10 19:08 < Rinn> Sometimes, Formentar, sometimes.
2008-01-10 19:08 < The359> In fact, the first criticism section states that Caplan is critical of the Austrian School because they reject certain mainstream ideas
2008-01-10 19:08 < Weaselosaurus> he'd be a fringe theorist if nobody listened to him or agreed with him. That is not the case.
2008-01-10 19:08 < The359> Yet does not in any way call them a pseudoscience
2008-01-10 19:08 < Nathyn> There are technically two sources for the extremism of Austrian economics -- first the quotes by Mises on Fascism and Nazism (a primary source), second the comments by Caplan (a secondary source). I could also cite Walter Block's support for "slave-contracts," Rothbard's suggestion it's OK to abandon children, and on and on..
2008-01-10 19:08 < The359> Instead, it merely explains why they do not see more publication
2008-01-10 19:08 < Nathyn> You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, The359, and you know it.
2008-01-10 19:08 < Rinn> There are too many people who take cookie dough and just have no idea what to do with it. Usually the cookie dough has a better chance of tasting better than the actual finished cookies.
2008-01-10 19:08 < Weaselosaurus> Note that Keynesianism at the time was all but set in stone.
2008-01-10 19:08 < The359> That's not an answer
2008-01-10 19:08 < Weaselosaurus> Nathyn: Another cheap deflection.
2008-01-10 19:08 < Rinn> Mirror shield!
2008-01-10 19:08 < The359> Why did that editor not call it pseudoscience?
2008-01-10 19:09 < The359> He doesn't even come close to calling it a pseudoscience
2008-01-10 19:09 < Nathyn> I see, I get it.
2008-01-10 19:09 < Nathyn> You assume that mobs of trolls can't gather around articles.
2008-01-10 19:09 < Weaselosaurus> People that have bad ideas aren't necessarily fringe ones.
2008-01-10 19:09 < Nathyn> We're through.
2008-01-10 19:09 < The359> Still not an answer
2008-01-10 19:09 < The359> Try again
2008-01-10 19:09 < Rinn> Aww.
2008-01-10 19:09 < Rinn> You're through?
2008-01-10 19:09 < Rinn> I was enjoying this.
2008-01-10 19:09 < Nathyn> No, you're all assuming good faith where it is entirely irrelevant.
2008-01-10 19:09 < Weaselosaurus> "you don't understand this, forget it" is the classic way to end an argument
2008-01-10 19:09 < The359> I'm assuming a statement, sourced TWICE
2008-01-10 19:09 < Nathyn> It's absolutely absurd. That's not a logical point, but a rhetorical point.
2008-01-10 19:10 < The359> Is better than your POV pushing
2008-01-10 19:10 < Nathyn> Someone who is going to debate with me over whether an advocate of the Nazis is a "fringe theorist," is not worth arguing with.
2008-01-10 19:10 < The359> And a source that actually uses what Caplan says
2008-01-10 19:10 < The359> And doesn't make grand leaps
2008-01-10 19:10 < Nathyn> Again, "the word is not there" is not an argument.
2008-01-10 19:10 < The359> Yes, it is
2008-01-10 19:10 < Weaselosaurus> Nathyn: Heidegger sympathized with the Nazis, as did Heisenberg
2008-01-10 19:10 < Nathyn> The359 -- you couldn't have read Caplan's essay in a manner of minutes.
2008-01-10 19:11 < Weaselosaurus> Nobody questions their scientific contributions.
2008-01-10 19:11 < The359> Are you claiming the word is there?
2008-01-10 19:11 < The359> Or that he simply says it in a different way?
2008-01-10 19:11 < The359> Since you seem to think I haven't read it
2008-01-10 19:11 < Nathyn> Did Heidegger support the Nazis on philosophical grounds, and did Heisenberg support the Nazis based on physics? No. In Mises work on political economy, he advocates them based on the field of research he's involved with.
2008-01-10 19:12 < The359> You seem to have difficulty in answering the simple questions, Nathyn
2008-01-10 19:12 < Rinn> I liked the Nazis' armbands.
2008-01-10 19:12 < Nathyn> The359 -- I can't answer the questions you make if I have to address incorrect statements that are flying at me from all sides, all at once.
2008-01-10 19:12 < Nathyn> I can only type so quickly.
2008-01-10 19:12 < The359> What's stopping you now?
2008-01-10 19:12 < Weaselosaurus> Eh, the Nazi state was about the most regulated economy in the world. And Heidegger did have some psychological points, and Heisenberg did have some bomb-related aspirations
2008-01-10 19:13 < Rinn> And swastikas are pretty swanky, too.
2008-01-10 19:13 < Nathyn> You just ask three questions in a row, The359.
2008-01-10 19:13 < Weaselosaurus> *philosophical
2008-01-10 19:13 < Rinn> You have to admit.
2008-01-10 19:13 < The359> So?
2008-01-10 19:13 < The359> Answer them
2008-01-10 19:13 < Nathyn> Please, dear god, man..
2008-01-10 19:13 < Nathyn> McCarthy -- please...
2008-01-10 19:13 * Messedrocker acquires the Rainbow Star
2008-01-10 19:13 < The359> You can call me all you want
2008-01-10 19:13 < The359> You've still avoided answering
2008-01-10 19:14 < Nathyn> Hold on, let me ask you a question: How did you read Caplan's entire essay so quickly?
2008-01-10 19:14 < Nathyn> And if you have no interest in economics, how did you understand it?
2008-01-10 19:14 * Weaselosaurus is reminded of Schopenhauer
2008-01-10 19:14 < The359> Does his essay contain the word Pseudoscience, or does he make the claim of pseudoscience in some other way?
2008-01-10 19:14 < bumm13> you can understand something that's not of interest to you
2008-01-10 19:14 < Nathyn> And if you did not understand it and have no interest in economics, what basis do you have to argue that "the word is not there", therefore it's false?
2008-01-10 19:15 < Weaselosaurus> Says your interpretation is POV at best and fitting reality to your needs at worst.
2008-01-10 19:15 < Nathyn> The359, there is more than one way to say, "Skin a cat." You can also say, "Slowly take the razor and slide it up the feline's back and listen to it squeal."
2008-01-10 19:15 < bumm13> ...
2008-01-10 19:15 < The359> Someone else used your exact same source and write a completely different sentence on it in the article
2008-01-10 19:16 < The359> Which does not in any way claim it to be a pseudoscience
2008-01-10 19:16 < Nathyn> Saying that the non-existence of a word in an essay means the meaning or assertion is not there is absurd.
2008-01-10 19:16 < The359> One that an economist is merely critical of for using alternative methods
2008-01-10 19:16 < The359> So why does yours magically use the same source and suddenly claim it is a pseudoscience?
2008-01-10 19:16 < The359> If the word pseudoscience is not there
2008-01-10 19:16 < Nathyn> I could demonstrate this by quoting Caplan DIRECTLY. And you did not answer my question: If you do not have an interest or background in economics, what authority are you to judge the meaning of such scholarly sources? Because you can scan the text for "THE WORD"? I don't think so.
2008-01-10 19:16 < The359> Where did I state anything about my interest?
2008-01-10 19:17 < The359> You seem to have a penchant for making up statements by others
2008-01-10 19:17 < Nathyn> Why are you asking such irrelevant questions?
2008-01-10 19:17 < Weaselosaurus> The claim alone that "most people consider it pseudoscience" is a bold statement.
2008-01-10 19:17 < The359> Quote Caplan
2008-01-10 19:17 < The359> Directly
2008-01-10 19:17 < Nathyn> If the word freedom is not in the Constitution, the Constitution doesn't advocate freedom. If the word "wrong" is not in my argument is infallible. This is the reasoning you are relying upon. I acknowledged my spurious reasoning above -- in on case -- have the humility to admit yours.
2008-01-10 19:17 < The359> Where he makes the claim that this is pseudoscience-like
2008-01-10 19:18 < The359> Since you know it so well
2008-01-10 19:18 < Nathyn> Give me a moment.
2008-01-10 19:19 < Nathyn> However, I do have to say there is one problem: Even the ability to quote it doesn't mean you'll necessarily follow the point. Single sentences in advanced math books still confuse the hell out of ME. I have the humility to admit this.
2008-01-10 19:19 < Weaselosaurus> go quote it, we'll see
2008-01-10 19:19 < The359> You could be spending this time finding the quote
2008-01-10 19:19 < The359> Instead of arguing
2008-01-10 19:20 < bumm13> Nathyn: you're treading way beyond the scope of your argument
2008-01-10 19:20 < Nathyn> Oh, Christ. The 359. It's blatantly at the end of his conclusion.
2008-01-10 19:20 < Nathyn> Read. http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan/whyaust.htm
2008-01-10 19:20 < Weaselosaurus> I would say to deep within.
2008-01-10 19:20 < bumm13> well, whatever
2008-01-10 19:21 < bumm13> it's disruptive
2008-01-10 19:21 < Weaselosaurus> eh, would you like to quote it for us?
2008-01-10 19:21 < Rinn> I think it's pretty funny, myself.
2008-01-10 19:21 < Nathyn> "Mises and Rothbard certainly produced an original alternate paradigm for economics - and applied this paradigm to a number of interesting topics. Unfortunately, the foundations of their new paradigm are unfounded"
2008-01-10 19:21 < bumm13> Rinn: well, that's one opinion :)
2008-01-10 19:21 < Nathyn> Now, the 359, I'm not going to debate with you over whether "The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog" actually describes a quick brown fox jumping over a dog.
2008-01-10 19:22 < The359> You call that a pseudoscience?
2008-01-10 19:22 < Nathyn> Yes.
2008-01-10 19:22 < bumm13> Nathyn: we understand you like semantics, no need to endlessly repeat that fact :)
2008-01-10 19:22 < Weaselosaurus> Now me: "Pseudoscience is any alleged body of knowledge, methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be scientific or made to appear scientific but does not adhere to the scientific method."
2008-01-10 19:22 < Nathyn> Saying the "alternate paradigm" is "unfounded" = pseudoscience
2008-01-10 19:22 < The359> No, it doesn't
2008-01-10 19:23 < Lycurgus> isn't the only "well-founded" part of economics the mathematics it uses?
2008-01-10 19:23 < Nathyn> Again, see the remarks about the quick brown fox. It's such a shame that editors like Essjay have had to fake their credentials to deal with idiots like you.
2008-01-10 19:23 < bumm13> Nathyn: civility, please. thanks
2008-01-10 19:23 < bumm13> Essjay, lol
2008-01-10 19:23 < Nathyn> Does it apply in IRC? Sorry if it does!
2008-01-10 19:23 < Weaselosaurus> if that was the case, Newton was a pseudoscientist.
2008-01-10 19:23 < Weaselosaurus> Because he was dead wrong about gravity.
2008-01-10 19:24 < Nathyn> Weasel -- I addressed these spurious arguments to the trolls editing the article. There were alternatives to evolution 150 years ago -- they're pseudosciences today.
2008-01-10 19:24 < Lycurgus> and a bunch of other stuff
2008-01-10 19:24 < Nathyn> Appeal to tradition.
2008-01-10 19:24 < Nathyn> And again, you all seem to be arguing, "BUT THE ARTICLE IS TRUE!!!"
2008-01-10 19:24 < The359> Pseudoscience according to who?
2008-01-10 19:24 < Nathyn> The359, ignored.
2008-01-10 19:24 < bumm13> and again, you use loaded terms like "the trolls" and "spurious"
2008-01-10 19:24 < The359> Cute
2008-01-10 19:24 < Weaselosaurus> Not the case. We are just trying to explain to you why your rash statements and removal of sources is considered vandalism.
2008-01-10 19:25 < The359> "Almost no literature in [[mainstream economics|mainstream]] [[academic journal]]s reference the school of [[Austrian economics]], because it is regarded as [[pseudoscience]] and not considered a legitimate school of economics." That is the statement Nathan added to the article
2008-01-10 19:25 < The359> That's not what the Caplan article says
2008-01-10 19:25 * Weaselosaurus is not a fan of the Austrian School himself
2008-01-10 19:25 < The359> And since that's your only source
2008-01-10 19:25 < The359> That makes it...pov
2008-01-10 19:25 < Weaselosaurus> a) might be tenable, b) is weasel-worded and wrong in this generality
2008-01-10 19:25 < Nathyn> No, Weasel, you're all just inclusionist wikidemocrats that will defend troll mobs over expert, good-faith editors.
2008-01-10 19:25 < bumm13> lol
2008-01-10 19:25 < Weaselosaurus> you're not an expert.
2008-01-10 19:25 < The359> Conspiracy!
2008-01-10 19:26 < The359> Cabal!
2008-01-10 19:26 < Weaselosaurus> Experts have nuanced writing styles.
2008-01-10 19:26 < Nathyn> Weasel -- not in particular, not with credentials, but I have taken Macroeconomic 101, I did pass the course with a high grade.
2008-01-10 19:26 < Weaselosaurus> lol
2008-01-10 19:26 < Nathyn> That puts me above The359's "Where is the word" arguments and "I still don't see the word"
2008-01-10 19:26 < Lycurgus> see that's what I love about him
2008-01-10 19:26 < Nathyn> ..which he refuses to admit is wrong.
2008-01-10 19:26 < Weaselosaurus> Your conclusions from the article that "it is considered pseudoscience" is simply wrong
2008-01-10 19:26 < bumm13> quit falling back on semantic arguments, it's silly
2008-01-10 19:26 < The359> Funny, I passed two Economics classes
2008-01-10 19:26 < Weaselosaurus> that's all
2008-01-10 19:27 < Nathyn> Half of you guys probably voted to take Adam Cuerden's powers away.
2008-01-10 19:27 * The359 guesses I'm above
2008-01-10 19:27 < Weaselosaurus> o.o
2008-01-10 19:27 < Nathyn> You people ought to be ashamed of yourselves for contributing to the public ignorance the way you do.
2008-01-10 19:27 < Formentar> Is there any better way to identify pseudoscience than by an absence of real citations? It's not scientists hold daily press conferences to denounce the latest crop of untrue statements.
2008-01-10 19:27 < Weaselosaurus> quit the ad-hominems.
2008-01-10 19:27 < Formentar> s/not/not like/
2008-01-10 19:27 < Weaselosaurus> they make you look silly
2008-01-10 19:27 < Nathyn> It's not ad-hominems because I'm not saying these statements to support my point: I'm making these observations in response to your absurd arguments here.
2008-01-10 19:28 < Nathyn> Nobody here will even call The359 out on his "show me the word" assertion.
2008-01-10 19:28 < bumm13> Nathyn: please cool the tone of rhetoric or it will be cooled in other ways
2008-01-10 19:28 < Weaselosaurus> "it is considered" means a majority of reputable sources.