Jump to content

User talk:Psychologist Guy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Biohistorian15 (talk | contribs) at 23:25, 16 October 2024 (That HDF article). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please review and freely edit, with thanks. There is lots to chew on in the talk page discussion. Zefr (talk) 19:30, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scientific racism - 30/500

Hello Psychologist Guy, I just read your reply at AN/I. I tend to agree. Would you, however, also agree that not just this one article but also e.g. Historical race concepts, Race (biology) and Neuroscience and race etc. should be put under indefinite protection? I'm kind of tired of all the socking relating to the question of human race differences. Biohistorian15 (talk) 09:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the Race (human categorization) ‎talk-page needs indefinite protection per WP:EVADE. Mikemikev has been using that talk-page on dozens of socks for about 14 years. The others are unlikely to qualify. Usually admins will only protect a talk-page due to persistent socking or vandalism. Psychologist Guy (talk) 20:37, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All on my watchlist now. Not protecting anything at the moment. Doug Weller talk 15:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Thank you for your contribution in defending Sadhguru page from misinformation on wiki page. Sciencefanforhumanity (talk) 09:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That HDF article

Hello Psychologist Guy. I am thankful that you specified your identity as a particular RationalWiki editor on my talk page; being transparent like this should not generally be discouraged. At the same time, it appears to me that you have now started writing articles almost exactly in RW format, and it's actually quite noticeable. I hope you don't intend to transition to doing this long-term?

For the time being, I ask you to please strike your WP:ASPERSIONS from that talk page as the email (*and second line of questioning thereafter) I sent and told you about, was entirely legitimate. I'm too boring of a person to have a personal COI on this matter. Regards, Biohistorian15 (talk) 22:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I won't be seeking deletion anymore though. The HNH article certainly establishes notability. Biohistorian15 (talk) 23:25, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]