Tiny Dancer 48 (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
:It is pointless going any further going down the "race" road with this person, maunus. They are *totally* uninterested in the science. -[[User:Darouet|Darouet]] ([[User talk:Darouet|talk]]) 17:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC) |
:It is pointless going any further going down the "race" road with this person, maunus. They are *totally* uninterested in the science. -[[User:Darouet|Darouet]] ([[User talk:Darouet|talk]]) 17:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC) |
||
::You are right, unfortunately this kind of editor pops up with a fairly regular frequency at that particular article and we have to dance a little while to their pipe before their agenda-driven disruption becomes blatant enugh that someone blocks them.[[User:Maunus|·maunus]] · [[User talk:Maunus|snunɐɯ·]] 18:43, 13 September 2016 (UTC) |
::You are right, unfortunately this kind of editor pops up with a fairly regular frequency at that particular article and we have to dance a little while to their pipe before their agenda-driven disruption becomes blatant enugh that someone blocks them.[[User:Maunus|·maunus]] · [[User talk:Maunus|snunɐɯ·]] 18:43, 13 September 2016 (UTC) |
||
::: The "agenda" of refuting Marxist pseudoscience with biology. [[User:Tiny Dancer 48|Tiny Dancer 48]] ([[User talk:Tiny Dancer 48|talk]]) 19:03, 14 September 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:03, 14 September 2016
GAR for Tycho Brahe
Tycho Brahe, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.
As I mentioned on the re-assessment page, the reviewer who took on the initial GA review is a very new editor having been here for just over a month. They haven't successfully contributed any GA's and weren't sufficiently familiar with GA expectations to give you a full review. As such, I have taken on the task of completing a GAR for the article. As a start the most pressing issues are with 2c and 6a. After those concerns are dealt with I'll move on to other criterion piece by piece with the intention of getting the article to GA status. I'll also be notifying the Wikiproject's who may be interested in participating. Ping me if you know of any other major contributors who may also be interested in participating in the GAR. Mr rnddude (talk) 23:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
You got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
EvergreenFir (talk) 20:03, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Unproductive heat at MOS
Maunus, if you believe SMcCandlish is being uncivil, why not use your powers of persuasion and conciliation to bring about a better environment for negotiation? It's going nowhere at the moment. Tony (talk) 07:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
multiregional hypothesis
If you ever want to team up to get this page straight, let me know. Jonathan Tweet (talk) 02:11, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
- A quick glance looks like it is pretty well developed and cites a lot of the relevant literature. Anything in particular you would like to straighten up about it? I havent read much about how the multiregionalists have responded to the most recent genetic data and the neanderthal and denisovan admixture findings - it seems that would require some restructuring of the hypothesis.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 05:05, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion
Hello, Maunus. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Tiny Dancer 48 (talk) 15:20, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
- It is pointless going any further going down the "race" road with this person, maunus. They are *totally* uninterested in the science. -Darouet (talk) 17:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
- You are right, unfortunately this kind of editor pops up with a fairly regular frequency at that particular article and we have to dance a little while to their pipe before their agenda-driven disruption becomes blatant enugh that someone blocks them.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 18:43, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
- The "agenda" of refuting Marxist pseudoscience with biology. Tiny Dancer 48 (talk) 19:03, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- You are right, unfortunately this kind of editor pops up with a fairly regular frequency at that particular article and we have to dance a little while to their pipe before their agenda-driven disruption becomes blatant enugh that someone blocks them.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 18:43, 13 September 2016 (UTC)