User talk:Edhubbard - Knowledge (XXG)

2477:

increasingly difficult to locate my bodily position and orientation with respect to the external world. Everthing is almost beginning to seem as if I were a one-dimensial being in a two-dimensional and flat universe. I find it extraordinarily difficult to navigate things like airports because its as if the whole aiport and the objects and people in it lack depth, width and height. I can only focus on the thing immeditaly before me, then I get lost in chaos. It's like trying to walk and intreract with a television or computer image. Horrifying and bizarre. Have you ever heard of anything similar? All I ever get (and probably will continue to get) from the medicos is: "we can find no organic explanation, take this anti-depressant, this anti-anxiety, this other psyhcopharma. etc,..." If I respond like this: "But none of this stuff works or is helping at all really", the answer is invariably "well,. let's try this (usually stronger and equally poorly uinderstood) psychopharma." This end result of this process is invariably he following: intense drowsiness and 16 hours of sleep a day. What kind of life it THAT?? So, these days, I have to tell the medicos: everything is going not too badly. I'm feeling about the same. translation: please leave me the fuck alone and don't make things worse, as you always end up doing when I say there is anything wrong with me and try to describe the indescribable and preposterous horror that I experience every day. At any rate, can you recommend any good, up-to-date neuroscience books of about intermediate level. I'm getting a bit weary of philosophy. --

1905:

know about digestion. On the other hand, along the lines of Frank Jackson's famous knwoledge argument, if one eventually knows everything single detail of electoehcimcal interactions, actions potentionals, signaling, precial mathemtiecal equatiosn to predict the future dvelopments of synaptic conncetions and so on, one will still not KNOW something fundamental: what was it like to be in that brain state (e.g. seeing red) for that particular body at that particualr time in that particular moment.This sensation is extraodinarily context-dependent and therefore defies abtrsaction and mathematical generalization. Seeing red-for-y-at-t-in-l is not the same as seeing red-for-y-at-t1-in-l much seeing red-for-q-at-t-in-p, etc.. You and I may be wired up in the exact same neuroligical configutation, and yet the red that this body sees is what that body has learned to call green and viceversa. The red that this body sees today is almosy certainly not the same red that this body experienced 10 years ago and yet the wavelengths are exactly the same. Anyway, that's one problem. And I don'0t think it's just a question of computational power or of language. Not one of ontology either, of course. I think it is fundamnetally a question of epistemological limitation in principle and nor just as a computational/practical matter.

1911:

it a disease or disorder? What exactly has gone wrong with the so-called mind process, how is this fixed, how did it arise,etc. etc,,?? If it is physical (as you must surely agree), why is is categorized as a mental disorder and treated by pschyistrists and phychologiists (i.e. MIND and BEHAVIOR fixers, whatever the hell that means) rather than BRAIN doctors (i,e, neurologists). Is it a disease like diabetes, encaphalitis, Parkinsons, cancer, etc...? If so, why can't it be tested for and localized like these other diseases instead of being first described in terms of undesirable behavioral manifetsations and then controlled by drugs which are determined to work because they have allegedly relieved the symptoms (perhaps by pharmcologically lobotomizing the patient??). What if there are diseases which have not yet been discovered which mimic the behaviroal manifestations of various allegedly pshchyolgocial disorders? What if there are infinitely many and they are all different one from another? How many people may have been locked up, labeled as looney and treated with the wrong medications, even killed, as a conseeuqnce of this fact.

233:(incidentally if either of you happened to live in virginia beach i'd imagine it would be quite possible; u already have the address of his childhood home on the video)-- then a desicion on it has to be made? if u were to hypothetically get an interview with pharrell, whilst it might settle your own mind, it wouldn't provide a better citation.. i can see that 'youtube' is not a traditional source, and that in theory the source could be deleted at any time, and it appears to be the only source on the planet, and doesn't mention synaesthesia atall directly however.. also the fact that; it is on an internationally known and reasonably respected channel, broadcast to millions and presumably with records, it is clear it was not an error; as he confirms it, and it comes directly from him, and is clear and varifiable it is actually him.. and it seems like a fairly accurate (if not in depth) description of sound: --> 400:

don't know what to think about that one, synesthesia seems more right to me, but on the other hand, the majority of the refs use synaesthesia... I'll go either way, but we need to make a choice soon. The see also and external links need pruning, but we are already on top of that. I think the lead could stand to be rewritten... It is good now, but still reads like a piecemeal assembly, which it is. The lead should be like a viable summary of the topic. It should be able to stand on its own as a 'mini article' that gives a concise summary of the most salient points of the topic. A good lead is a tricky thing to create, but it can really set the stage for a good article. A bad lead will quickly shoot down any FA attempt. Now that the article is more rich, it may be time to read over the article, and write from scratch a new lead that more effectively communicates the general points of the article.

3612:, I am lousy at hunting these things out. Re: your talk page commment: the answers would be yes, perhaps, and my edit. I have no reason to suppose (or presuppose) that you meant any slight in naming me on the talk, but others, perhaps less thoughtful, may take the opportunity to personalise what is a controversy outside of our document. The action and the user responsible is evident from the diff, but the fact that I made the edit is not pertinent; it was not a spontaneous or unilateral action, nor am I well known (AFAIK) for making such edits. I would greatly appreciate a refactoring of your finding. There was an 'archive' made on the talk page that may provide some illumination, and I am happy to link or release the related discussions on the matter. Best regards, 1931:

though. Genuine problems which we can't answer and which, fundamnetally, are not really all that important. I'm finding it incerasingly difficult to take philosophy seriously, at all. This is what I was trying to get it. No point. Why do I waste my time studying useless subjects with no practical implications for anyone on earth, and which I am not even particularly gifted at? Because I'm no use to anyone in any case. I can do nothing outstandingly well. Just another Gustav van Aschanbach-mediocrity. I started out in music in fact. I was happy then. Full of illusions, hopes and grandiose fantasies. Then nature took it all away. Who cares? Enough. But you have actually studies a useful field and probably even helped people. Why bother with philosophical nonsense? --

1083:

support ID feel like they can and should vote on the scientific accuracy of the age of the earth, or something like that. Where politics, social values and science clash the debate becomes far too heated, and in these cases, it although it seems like the fight for truth is eventually won by the side that can produce the best evidence, the battle is always accompanied by unnessecary causualties (editors leaving, etc). For some of these things, there has to be a better way than the current system of edit, revert, discuss... perhaps the system should become more one of discuss and edit for any article above a certain level of quality and length, no matter how contentious it might or might not be. I don't know.

198:

considering adding Nicholas Saunderson (and still might, after a bit more work and consideration on the matter), a name that doesn't rapidly spring to the mind of most people nowadays as in any way recognizable; and yet, ... he was hugely famous in his time, holding what is now Stephen Hawking's chair, and does indeed have a good-sized Knowledge (XXG) article on him. Nevertheless, likewise, (quite to my surprise!) Wiki currently has no entry for John William 'Blind' Boone, a fairly influential American composer and musician (whose synesthesia is fairly well substantiated but, alas, again, useful references are lacking -- although I be working on it!), although one may find other web pages about him. So, ....

52:

From my learning, I believe that the ventral visual stream is altered in such patients to ultimately change the entorhinal cortex's function, eventually producing an isolated, parallel network, with the dorsal stream. I believe this is due to the immense network of corticocortical efferents between the medial temporal lobe, an adaptation to allow for meaning to be associated with formants. I know, anecdotally, that our visual cortexies have an immense signal processing power. They can analyze the spectrum of base auditory input and coalesce it into visual stimuli, given enough 5-HTergic pyramidial cortical input to the thalamus.

1075:

to realize that the referencing thing isn't just due to the need for scientific rigor... If it were, many articles would be fine as they were. Rather, it's because we cannot assume any shared background, and that articles need to be made almost 100% watertight against *anyone* who might come along and argue about something... "prove to me that the Earth is round... show me a ciation" Or, for example, arguing with the people who really believe that the moon landings were a hoax, that Bush actually planned 9/11, or that there are aliens who can read our thoughts and who we need to protect against by wearing a

1079:. "Show me a reference that says that aliens don't exist, and that they can't read my thoughts" (show me a reference proving the negative... great!). This is where wikipedia is frustrating. In some ways, it's just a bulletin board for the culture wars... but to counteract that, we now have overly restrictive referencing policies that we don't need within, for example, the philosophy or neuroscience communities, and the sometimes frustrating realization that you can't find a citation for something because it has been so taken for granted that no one has even bothered to write a peer-reviewed article on it. 56:

is the predominant ligand used for animal research in this field. My question to you, is could you refer me to any studies/books regarding voltage gated ion channels/plasticity in the visual cortex? Google scholar's great for specific stuff, but this is kinda an open ended question. Really just any resources on anything, about the (mesoscopic) synaptic structures and NT cascades, regarding aberrant experiences would be greatly appreciated. I'm not entirely sure if this is appropriate for a talk page, but if you could be so kind and help me in my quest to understand, I would be eternally grateful.

3396:'ve gotten myself involved in the social neworking nonsense now. It's a long story. Anyway, I posted a "blog", as they are called on there, criticizing certain aspects of Tibetan Buddhism and the Dalai lama. Suddenly I find myself getting hammered by the Dawkins anti-theist cultists on one side and some theosophiscal gibberish-mongers on the other. My original purpose was to expose the hyprocricy of a certain young lady who claimed to be a skeptical naturalist type, but promoted Buddhism and the DL on her front page. If you ever get bored, come on over <a href=" 1584:

published, it does seem odd, but it would make little difference to the psi debate as there are countless studies of psi ability which have been fully published, including studies of Ingo Swann. I think the psi issue is a side area for Persinger but one that his findings support. What are your thoughts on Blanke's belief that there should be more study of the psi area in a neuroscience context due to the objective experience of one of his patients? PS: Also thanks for the positive comment on the deletion page for Project Rational Skepticism. -

987:. Yes, if you go with a list, it's harder to summarize it back to the main article, but I think the new poster is wrong to call it a POV fork. You can summarize the most important or best known cases back to the main article: that is not POV. For me to discuss the two most important and well-known TS people back to the main article is not POV - it's summary style. But, you can also solve the whole problem by handling it as epilepsy did: the list is only linked to the article in See also - no need to carry the info twice. 144:

than a private interview or such, I don’t think that it, in itself, is sufficient. I mean, it sounds very good, and like Pharrell is very possibly a synesthete, or at least a fair bet. But I just feel we need something more solid. Granted that there are others who have been put on the list with just about as scant of information or support, but at least, with those, there are hard-copy references which have been considered by more than just a few experts and which others may be referred to for continued debate.

4266:

right. How would that differ from computer science or electrical engineering? You argue that AI "is part of" cogsci. I would argue that part of it is part of CogSci. Similarly not all philosophy is a proper subset of cogsci. Now it could be that you mean some cognitive scientists wonder, e.g., whether a machine can be conscious. I agree, they do. But this, I would argue is not the sort of thing that should hit readers on the first sentence of a definition to cognitive science.

3593:

problems are deeper. I have never experienced FAR before but I saw some FA nominations which resulted into significant improvements thanks to reviews of editors independent of the authors and I thought this would be the same. Unfortunately the FAR is probably much less attractive to wiki editors than FA nomination. But I still think that it would help the article, after all the changes which were or are going to be made, if somebody did an independent and thourough review.

1051:

standards. I think it will be an inevitable progression in the procedures for evaluating articles that the specialist articles will no longer fall within in the scope of knowledge of the average reviewer. Eventually, there will have to be grading systems within the individual projects and this is what will determime wthere an article is excellent, good, moderate and so on. the same people who review film articles cannot review articles like anomalous monism.--

4312: 2739:'s edits to this article were extremely POV-pushing. Problem is that he's gotten other people with longterm similar agendas (or gone back to an old account, as something about his editing history seems VERY suspicious for an alleged new editor) to revert to that same massively POV-pushing version. I reverted again, but I expect there to be problems with this group. If you could watch the article I would appreciate it. 4745: 2388:

the lecture hall. what advice would you give about how to pursue this? idealy i'd like to spend a couple of months in a university in china or other asia country (got the asian bug on my "gap year"). I totally realise this is a strange way to get advice, but i've found with these kind of things the further you spread your net the better your catch will be. I'm not really having much luck at the moment tho'...

3931: 625:

cases where the British English spelling seemed to be preferred, I used the ] code to avoid changing the preferred spelling in article space, while doing what I thought was my job, which was making sure that links continued to point where they were supposed to go. It's worth stressing here that this isn't willy-nilly "link cleanup" but rather something I felt obligated to do, as the mover of the page.

4563: 2276:

the word? That would be something we could cite in the entry. Not comletely necessary, but it would be nice. And finally, would you be willing to grant us permission to use your translation of a portion of the Flournoy text (at most a couple of the relevant paragraphs). I understand that it isn't complete, so let me know about that. If not, we can work around it. Thanks again for your help.

3516:

Madame Blavatsky, etc.. Take a look at the video when you have some time, or just take my word for the basics, and let me know what you think as a colleague of this lady. Does not her (implicit) argument from her personal experience to ontological/metaphysical conclusions remind you of those who claim that god exists because they have felt his existence in experience. <a href="

1951: 4699: 4521: 4136: 4079: 2102:, while moving closer to the image, and fixating at the center, you will see the red colors grow in size, but as you pull back, the blue colors grow larger. If you fixate on one of the corners instead of the center of the image, the reverse occurs (i.e., blue colors grow as you move closer to the image). Thanks for any insight you can provide. — 1891:

the tip of the tip of the iceberg in this area. Someone will perhaps understand what happened to my own brain, objectively, in about three hundred tears. I will insist on a throughough autopsy to ensure that what is there, but has not been discovered by MRIs, etc.., is actually found out. Experientially, however, no one will ever have a clue.--

1821:

of this, and therefore humans and animals have a strong relation to questions and answers) with an answer/logic/science, is far more objective +(Wiki+rules=neutral) than subjective +(Wiki-rules=bias), because I am using inductive reasoning - which is a strong prerequisition of objectivity. See for yourself: General Applications/Objectivism.

902:, I found it helpful, and that it helped me see what areas I hadn't covered well. In particular, notice there how they recommend my TS article in terms of how to handle "Notables" or "famous cases": your notable list isn't referenced, and you might have a look at how I did it. Your Table of Contents also might need to be tightened up. 857:]). At this point, what I'd like is for someone who hasn't been too closely associated with our edits to come and give it a look over, and to highlight any particular weak spots, etc. In particular, the article is a little longer than I would like so any thoughts on trimming or farming out to our fork pages would be appreciated. 4415:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are 4360:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are 3557:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are 1733:, which ends up being a momentous task involving buses, hitchhiking, making biodiesel in the parking lot of a Chinese restaurant, etc. And thats all before even getting there. No time for editing. Hopefully this winter I can spend more time editing. I'd like to continue to help out where I can. If you want to make a push for FA on 1472:. I must say I did find the discussion interesting and thoughtful, which was a refreshing change to the usual ad hominum arguments and indignant dismissive attitude I usually encounter here. If you have any more information you can send me please do so, I like to be informed of both sides of the debate. Best wishes - 178:

looking into new additions. However, in the event that we get someeone that persists, we will want to be prepared to both argue for our procedure, and to say that we are doing everything we can to make some progress on this. It sounds like you are doing everything that any reasonable Pharrell Williams fan could ask.

1363:

be, and not respond. If he starts to screw with the page itself, then I will intervene. Of course, if you want to fight the troll, I got your back, man (also read your Dangerfield comment). In the meantime, just remember the trolls win if they drive off one of, if not the best, philosophy editor on wikipedia.

3576:

Dear Edhubbard. I thought that everybody can see that the sections I asked to expand are extremely short and shallow and that everybody must admit that a similar expansion (together with previous changes made during the last two years) needs a review. Originally I also thought you would help to solve

3510:

Edward Hubbard, what the heck happened to you? Look, I know you're still around here somewhere old boy.I just wanted your scientifically informed opinion about this recent "sensational" viral video that has been traversing the webs. In a nutshell, the neuroscientist, Jill Bolte Taylor, had a stroke

3405:

Yes, I was a little hard on the bastard, but I'm am damned contrarian and I got sick and tired of Christian and Muslism-----no, JUST Christian bashing really---and thought I would provoke some thought about another religion with some weird and non-scientific stuff going. This was the true intent. Now

2823:

in terms of length and content—much of it should be re-integrated into sections that come later in the article. Thanks for your continued work on the article. I hope we can work together to improve it further. I won't revert it back for now, but I hope you will take my criticisms to heart and work

2239:

Thanks for that; I'll have to do a little more research (just found a copy of the Calkins article), and hopefully we can get a decent etymology going. The wiktionary policy on etymologies seems to be uncertain at the moment, so it looks as though there's plenty of room for paving the way... I'm going

2203:

Hello Dr. Hubbard. First of all, allow me to thank you again for all the work you have done on the synesthesia content on Knowledge (XXG). I have used the Synesthesia article several times as a shining example to convince people of the promise of wikipedia as a reliable and accurate medium, comparing

1630:

Hi Ed. The carefully crafted consenus we had on the definition of Delusion has been removed by two of the "defenders of the faith" who systematically remove things that may be seen as critical of the Great Man. I see from your comment on talk that you are working on it - thanks. Seems to me that the

1347:

I see we have another crank with a masters in softward engineering (or something like that) who is possting BS all over the Free Will talk page. I was deeply offended by the comment on the bottom of that page and I am in a VERY, VEEEEEEEEEERY deep state of depression right now. I am strongly tempted

1310:

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work.

1021:

I thoroughly recognize and value his contributions, feel like I understand his neurochemistry very well, and besides that I've lived in Italy and have Italian relatives: but my patience ends when he refuses my help and friendship, and insults me as well. I've been patient and defended him to others

197:

Re 'famous', I'll go with your premise here. My guess is that we are not too likely to too often run across someone whom we could otherwise substantiate as 'famous' who doesn't also have a Wiki article, or who doesn't deserve one to be slapped together on other, separate grounds. For example, I was

55:

The role of NMDA receptors is crucial, of course, for these FFT producing networks to arise. Within the ventral visual stream, a reducing fractal network exists, which produces depth perception given the different bilateral input. Deficits in these NMDAergic networks are what causes psychosis: Mk-801

51:

You seem like someone with a good understanding of the visual cortex's role in cognition. As someone without funding for university, I have relatively little formal education. But I need an expert's opinion on my hypothesis of the role of an altered layer V-basal axis in the genesis of schizophrenia.

4029:

Free Will. If it is agreed that the names are equivalent, then the difference is that this content, and the content I will add, discusses a Determined Will. And if we have Determined Will, people should know about it. And for people to know about it, it needs to have a name besides "not free will".

4028:

Thanks for the move! I think that was a great idea, and I agree that the summary will be short, especially considering I'm going to add a bunch of the most up to date articles to the Determined Will main article. I hope you'll support my idea of using THAT page rather than Neuroscience of Not Having

3735:

Hi Ed: I finally put up my Wiki page after having it on my to-do list for TWO YEARS. Takes some getting used to this code and guidelines. I just discovered the "history" tab, and see you've been editing the synesthesia page. I didn't know about the YouTube copyright thing, so thanks for taking that

3652:

Please, don't bother - I may have been oversensitive. Perhaps you might reflect on whether my view on naming the edit, rather than the editor, has merit in facilitating discussions in the future. I do think that pulling the section from the archive is worthwhile, particularly as it is on FAR. I have

3424:

Hi Ed! Sorry about the delay in replying to your message on my talk page, I've been super busy (in real life). You're right, LoveMonkey is completely in the wrong about mixing the two different definitions of Libertarianism. However that was some time ago - what is the situation now, has he accepted

2368:

That was extremely helpful, thank you. I ask because I've been writing a science-fiction story (on-and-off) which features a synesthetic character (a robber) who is able to "see", for instance, a security system that uses invisible lasers. The idea I had was exactly like what you expressed with your

2275:

Just a couple more things, when you get a chance. Could you, in fact, send me the french text of the Flournoy article (we can quote it in the french entry) if it's convenient. Also, have you or anyone else you know of claimed in a published work that the Calkins article is the first English usage of

1910:

Anyway, my point was that most of you neuros are so damned confused and confusing on the matters that you can't even get basic stuff sorted out: is depression, for example, a mental or a phsycial disorder. If it is mental, what does this mean?? Where is it? etc.. in my ASS, my teeth, my toes? Why is

1890:

So what's the big deal about this organ anyway? Just another lump of rotting meat with unusal electical and chemical patterns going on there, isn't it? (-; The brain secretes mind like the liver secretes bile!! Indeed. Mankind hasn't even touched the infintesimal speck of dust sitting on the tip of

1809:

Perhaps you think science doesn't belong in philosophy; I understand this, however, a principle is a concept/thought/neurotransmitter. The correct principals of reasoning and logic are science. To form an abstraction around a perceived perogative such as "honoring" the principals and mysticsm around

1615:

Ed. Thanks v much for the sandbox etc.. I too will be rather busy for the next week or so, but I'll have a go. Thanks also for your comments re Laplace, you're right it's better to leave the might and put the issues in the LD. Though the more I think about it the more I think it's a red herring, a

1512:

In comparing Persinger and Blanke I wanted to find if there was any reference to Blanke's attitude towards objective factors in these experiences and interestingly I found that in a 2002 BBC radio debate Blanke stated that one of his patients was able to make accurate visual observations while in an

1082:

As for reviewing, I think that it has been assumed that people that are interested in a topic are the ones that will review, and if someone who cares about film also cares about anomalous monism, then they will edit and comment on both, and there is no conflict there. The problem is when people who

1074:

But, that's where things get complicated. At the borders of what we know, or think we know, there is still a lot of debate. Some of it is scientific, and should be reflected in the articles. Some of it, though, is POV, and should not be. The more I've been thinking about this, the more I've come

978:

It looks like more than one thing is going on in that debate. 1) A newcomer to the article has fixated on a minor point: maybe let it go for a while and come back to it. Don't let it sidetrack your other work; it's a big deal about a small point. 2) Do you want the second article to be a list or

662:

Hi, EDH. I'm not an admin, but I see clearly the case you are making, and think that any admin would also see it as vandalism, albeit cleverly disguised. In the past, I had a terrible time with vandals on Tourette's, and I can't remember which admin added the article to a vandal bot for me. At any

379:

Re the External Links section of synesthesia, I agree, its getting a little dense... I'd like to clean up the see also section as well. I'll try to go through and check out some of the links, to see what really needs to be there. The sectioning has prevented it from being a complete train wreck, but

3715:

loresiensis, but eventually decided that any "proposed species" can be named and explained without suggesting it is valid. There are a number of taxa, though a great deal less sensational, that have their name in the title; the explanation in the text covers the lack of a taxobox in those articles.

3183:

The diffs are pretty much the most important thing in the reports, well I think it is :). I think it would be important to mention the ACLA/Latino/Mexican threats/personal attacks, as them by themselves, can quickly show that it is very much the same person as they are very distinctive and then the

2818:

It's tough for me to defend the new version of article as improving substantially on the old version. A great amount of text is added, but it is not developed methodically, and much of it has the tone of a CV rather than an encyclopedia article. The portions that summarize the science do not seem

2357:

Hey Ed! I've been meaning to ask you this for a while... is it possible that a synesthetic might exist who was able to control their abilities to a point where they really "saw" things that were there, but invisible to those who interpret their senses normally? What I mean is, something like, being

1820:

This own era of thought is the definitive: the absolute: the thought which thinks itself; the catalyst. I suggest that the concept of a foreground, or "start" of a "the" flowchart in respect to underlying the concept of answering questions (remember conflict induces prowess, and evolution is a fact

1649:

Hi Ed. I had a go at responding to your helpfully detailed comments on the Noble, Conway Morris, Bateson, Midgley issue, both on the talk page and then, after a delay, in the article. Spark promptly reverted. I hope I have addressed your concerns: if I haven't then please explain and/or insert your

710:

to the vandalism bot watchlist - so more Recent changes patrollers are likely to spot the vandalism. A bot is not smart enough to revert this type of vandalism, but adding the article to the watchlist will alert Recent changes patrollers every time an anonymous user edits the article, and hopefully

415:

There's so much mishmash still there (even after the radical surgert I perfromed on it this morning by just moving the theology section out), that I'm not exactly sure which part you are talking about. The section on Neuroscience and free will or the more general section on science and free will? I

3739:

Likewise, I'm now getting warnings that I'm not supposed to do my own page because it's a "conflict of interest" (I see you got a warning too). This seems odd, because all the syn guys have done their own. Suggestions? Guidance? Maybe it will come down to us trading code: I'll do you and you do me

3515:

even beging to describe such things to the MDs, they usually try putting me on Haldol or shock therapy or something, for christ's sake!! And rightly SO!!) Anyway, the nut....I mean neuroscientist Taylor claims that her experiences show that we are all connected like the great ONE of Parmenides and

3490:

It's the real REALNESS of the higher HIGHNESS, baby! Consciousness is emergence, emergence is consciousness. KEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWL!! Enough, I'm moving toward reductionism. Kim is right, all this other shit just leads to either mystical nonsense or epiphenomenalism. After 15 years of a priori

3348:

but when once they got blocked, the report was closed as all of the users suspected sockpuppets mentioned were blocked. If more sockpuppets come along, we'll probably have to file another report if the new users aren't blocked yet. But I think there are a few admins that are aware of the situation

2711:

I can't find the exact source, but there is one quote in which Einstein very clearly dissociated himself from atheism. Something to the effect that rejecting the possibility of divinity/God/whatever was as absurd to him as accepting it. In another place, he ambivalently accepts "Spinoza's God". Of

2387:

i'm a neuroscience student at UCL london and am looking for a bit of advice on something. i'm in my first year and am really enjoying the course and so i'd like to do something in the summer that would be beneficial and informative. i'd like to have some experiences in the field out the context of

1904:

Actually, that was not quite my point. But, then, you neuros do tend to be far too reductionist/eleiminsativst even for my physicalist tastes. The problem is that if one knows absolutely everything there is to know about the stomach, then eo ipso one knows everything that there can possibly be to

1846:

Anyway, I know you've got issues with wikipedia, and I've recently taken an enjoyment in adding to some articles. I've come across some respectable and easy-going members dedicated to helping the principal, and of course, more often than not, I've come across hoarding editors fit only to see their

1664:

Hi Ed, Thank you very much for the rewording of the copyright statement. I find the wiki copyright requirements quite confusing. The fact is that Anne loves to see her painting on Wiki but I was not able to upload it without Wiki warnings for speedy deletion. Again, thanks a lot. Cretien 22/11/06

1535:

I will post my "original research" and POV (OH MY GAAAAAWD!!) and my name is attached automagically to evetything I write. Nobody can edit it without my permission!! Ohhhh, I like this idea better than Knowledge (XXG). In fact, I was thinking of creating a spin.-off project where I would post only

1362:

the middle finger. From 8 am to 10 pm, nothing but frustrations, nothing works, we had four and five people working on it the whole day, still no good... I think it might be best to adopt a "don't feed the trolls" policy with him. If he restricts his crap to the talk page, I will gladly leave it

630:

Now that I see that "redirects aren't bad" I guess I could have left it in the minority of cases where the British English spelling was preferred. However, in the large majority of cases (maybe 90-100 out of about 120), the American English spelling was preferred, and therefore my changes not only

399:

is very close to GA status, and FA is not an impossibility. We can submit it for peer review, but peer review has been a little slow recently, so we may not get much response. There are a few things that I think need to be resolved before GA submission. The big one is the spelling thing... I still

120:

In fact, I'm fairly familiar with your work as well! The papers you wrote with Ramachandran have been a pleasure and a great resource. I'm actually fairly honored to have been contacted by you, and i might get on those edits a little faster just on virtue of my gratitude for your research. Keep up

109:

I'm familiar with all three! I did a project two years ago that focused largely on a discourse between the two. I have most of what i need, thanks, i just need to get around to it. I have a lot of wikipedia projects that i've been sitting on but just haven't gotten around too. Thanks for reminding

3653:

pondered whether it should have the status of FA, given that it is unresolved, controversial and therefore unstable. We should avoid being a nomenclator, and there is a great risk of that; compressing the explanation into data in an infobox (the taxobox) is likely to mislead our readers. Regards,

2765:

for an argument of that point. Just because a term comes up in google search results doesn't make it real. Overall I'm not sure it is appropriate to list it on the memory page. If you still feel like it should be included on the page, we should mention it on the talk page there and see how others

2312:

BTW, thank you for your work on synaesthesia and related themes on Knowledge (XXG). It's an area that fascinates me though it is only peripheral to the areas I studied - my MSc is in visual perception, but on perception of angular extent (my supervisor for that is also an occasional editor here -

2076:

I've read in your papers about the possible use of synesthesia in normal people (eg, "loud shirt", "sharp cheddar"). Are these really examples of synesthesia? After all, people aren't really hearing noises when they see a shirt, or feeling stabbing pains when they eat cheese. Isn't it more likely

154:

Meanwhile, although I saw your initial response re Pharrell Williams before, I am curious as to what your stance might be now. Do you think the video clip previous provided via the link is sufficient to use as citable reference? I guess I just want something more; including something more solid

150:

Now, what I would like to do would be to interview Pharrell and, somehow, lead him to producing something more solid which could be referenced. However, as you might guess, getting hold of Pharrell Williams in nigh impossible. Still, I will pursue the matter a ways further and see what might be

143:

Ed, the problem with Pharrell Williams is the question of whether his statement alone, in that one interview, should be deemed sufficient to declare that he has synesthesia. The thing is, we want solid material that we can refer people to. While this interview clip does exist, and stands better

3710:

unstable. Facts have been added that do not necessarily accord with the article as a whole, uncited statements have crept in that give undue weight to any acceptance or protest, and the necessary and strict adherence to NPOV is, perhaps, slightly lacking. I also thought about the name as title,

2034:

I´m a young spanish neuropsychologist who red two years ago Ramachandran´s book Phantoms in the brain and I simply loved it. I thouht you would be interested in knowing that I have added a whole paragraph in the Capgras Syndrome article about Ramachandran´s patient. It´s a pleuseure meeting you.

1930:

In the simplest terms possible: I beleive this is a genuinely philosophical problem. Like all philosophical problems, it has no solution. It's like actualism versus possibilism or four-dimensional endurantism versus perdurantism. These are actually intersting questions. Hopelelessy non-empirical

1793:

The concept of a question can induce the reform of neutrality, but conflict does induce prowess. I understand this. I will, however, argue the correlation of neutrality to philosophy, and argue the prerequisition of any theories I have "tried" to express. My additions have no new scientific data

810:

I'm studying A-Level psychology and I was doing a little bit of research about it on Knowledge (XXG) and I thought it might be useful to categorise it under cognition. Plus I have several psychiatric disorders (Asperger Syndrome, bipolar disorder and a mild form of epilepsy) so I'm interested in

624:

to be using to do something else, changing all the links to the old synaesthesia page. In most cases, this meant simply changing the link, since many of the pages used modern American English for other distinguishing words (color instead of colour, specialized instead of specialised, etc.). In

183:

On a related note, one thing that I was thinking about the other day, is, for new suggestions, what constitutes famous? For someone to be a "famous synesthete" we need to be able to agree that they are both famous and a synesthete. One suggestion that seems reasonable to me is that we consider

4265:

I accept that cogsci studies machines in the sense that robots and computational models running on machines are used to model cognition, or even in the sense that astronomers study telescopes (with apologies to E W Dijkstra), but I fail to see how cognitive science studies machines in their own

2476:

How're things going? Just got back from three-week visit to States. My head feels like it has been continuously pumped up with oxygen like a hot air balloon for about 20 years,and as if it is being squeezed and pushed and pulled around simulatneously in about 25 different directions. I find it

2264:

Just realized you gave me two citations for Calkins. I've just found the other one, in case that's the one you were actually talking about (that you had trouble finding). I can email that to you if you like. Also, I was wondering why the word 'synaesthesia' never actually appeard in the (other)

1583:

Thanks for your professional input on the neuroscience section, it looks much clearer. If you could add some explanation in layman’s terms of the general functions of the areas of the brain mentioned I think that would also be an improvement. I was not aware of the original data having not been

177:

So far, we have had just a couple of people (always IPs, instead of named users) and they seem to not persist when I revert. I think it's good that we have a documented conversation on this, so that people know that this is something we are working on, and that we have a procedure in place for

2960:

Copy and pasting my edits I see. In fairness, the burden rests on both your shoulders to resolve this dispute peacefully, rather than making your point by multiple reverts and revisions. However, I believe that hubbard here is right, since talk pages are for discussion about how to improve the

349:

I'd love your help working on Ramachandran's article, as well as some of the sub articles. I'll write what I can, but I'd love your help keeping the science on track. I'm OK at separating reasonable information from blatant BS, but you need to keep an eye on my details. I'm also pretty good at

341:

Hi, thanks for the message! I'm impressed that you studied with Ramachandran, I've always respected his work. My background is in Physics, not Neurology, but I've got a personal facination with it, and feel bad that one of the most interesting neurologists in the world has but a mere stub bio.

171:

Hi Sean, I'm in 100% agreement with you. I think that you're exactly right, both that the quote is suggestive, and that it, in and of itself, it doesn't quite reach threshold. I agree that the ABC clip, by itself, is citable as definitive. If we have some other corroborating source (is there a

3592:

Hello again. Thank you for the copyedits of my contributions, because they need them, and for your effort to find the refs. I also want to explain that I did not start this FAR just because of the questions I raised at the H. f. talk page, but because I finally came to the conclusion that the

2342:

Ho, I just had an idea, old fellow. Why don't you just quit this lunatic research into synesthesia and other neuro-phenomena and I will pay you fifty centesimi or three sticks of freshly made (whichever you prefer) to post an article on my blog every week or so?? What sayst though? This is a

1813:

Undermining the meaning of the logical process to which Philosophy is practically based upon isn't a direction I'm ready to let this article be subjected to. Mysticsm or a simple concept of neutrality can undermine what sorts of things exist and what are their essential natures (metaphysics).

854:

page to a reasonable status. I started working on it on July 25, and it was a mess; tagged with expert, clean-up and unreferenced tags. Now, I am starting to hope that it is a good summary style article, with shiny new Harvard reference-style references, and factually acrruate (compare here

671:), asking for help from admins. Specifically, ask them if you can be exempted from 3RR in this case, as it is vandalism. And, ask if they can add it to any bot lists to prevent this from occurring. Let me know if that strikes out, or if I can be of any other help. I'm almost certain that 1050:

Ok, here's the deal. The fact is you will not find many of the articles that are on Knowledge (XXG) in a general encylopedia. There are innumerable specialist articles here. There's no other way to put it: Knowledge (XXG) is no longer a general encylopedia and should not be held to the same

274:

The general issue is interesting, but mind wandering just is not a psychological term, not in DSM-IV etc. so I wish you would keep psychology out of it -- unless you make it clear that you are talking about Experimental Psychology which APS represents. I'm pretty vigilant on this issue of

298:

Since you are an experimental psychologist, take it that direction. I'm just super-sensitive after dealing with "Wizard(psychology)", right after "evolutionary psychoanalysis", on the afd list -- the most recent battles. Few people seem to understand the distinction between psychology as a

232:

So unless you have hope of actually reaching pharrell-- and i would imagine that a well written letter from the President of the American Synesthesia Association, ie sean, would provoke interest and a response, that is assuming it gets to him, and would no doubt take a long time if it did

1066:

I think you have a good point here... The English Knowledge (XXG) has definitely grown beyond its humble beginnings (I just had a look at that Italian FA). It's no longer an encyclopedia in the sense of Britannica (the cannon of knowledge, and nothing but the cannon) but rather, an

1728:

Its good to be back. :) I go on "Wiki-binges" where I spend a lot of time editing, then real life catches up, and I have to drop it for a while, then come back later. In the last case, August and September are completely absorbed the the process of planning for, and going to

767:

LOL - we were doing the same thing at the same time (vacation, internet cafes). The patrolling is working so well, I was considering removing the article from my watchlist. What do you think? By the way, there is another Philosophy FAR in need of input, votes, whatever:

3088:

I've figured out how to start the report, and I'm working on getting the diffs now for the evidence section, but if you want to help, that would be great. Give me about ten minutes to complete some edits so that we don't ec on that page... BTW, have you seen anyone before

603:"Using the form below will rename a page, moving all of its history to the new name. The old title will become a redirect page to the new title. Links to the old page title will not be changed; be sure to check for double redirects (using "What links here") after the move. 365:

need work. Right now it seems like no one ever had phantom pain until 1998. ;) I added a few paragraphs about historical treatments, but the article doesn't really give a sense of how significant the new thoughts about the neurological reasons for phantom limbs really are.

2308:

Hi Ed - unfortunately most of the information I have is from tapes of (undated) radio interviews and the like. I've put out a request for source information on the Robyn Hitchcock email mailing list, so hopefully someone there can come up with something more definitive.

3743:

Anyway, glad I'm here. I'll be wading my way through this for a while till I get the hang of it. It was actually fun paring down the syn page (there was a warning that it was too long). I see now I should have annotated the sections. Ah well, next time. Hope you are

4383:

Hey I go to a university that is creating Knowledge (XXG) pages as a project and we need to find 2 people in our related field to review our article for improvements. Can you look over mine? It'd be much appreciated. I can send you the link if you're interested.

2791:

However, if biologists succeed in creating "living" out of non-living materials, that is creating even DNA from scratch, I think that it does show Midgley's argument that biology cannot be reducible to chemistry is wrong. Sorry about this long run on sentence.

3885:

Hi Ed, good to hear from you. I haven't been an active editor for years due in some part to the emotional strain of engaging in anonymous debates. I left quietly, without grandstanding, because I still had faith in the democratic mission of Knowledge (XXG).

1011:

I hope that's what is bothering him: I didn't realize he had been hit so hard by the GA notifications. They were only intended to let people know that articles should gradually be brought to standard. He added some not so good stuff to his user page :-(

1856:

The main arguements were correlated with science not being able to be contrasted into philosophy, but easily, I refuted such claims. Now it is a mere matter of Wikipedias' code of conduct stating that any opinions and arguements are totaly inappropiate.

1467:

Dear Edhubbard, I was wondering if you have a link to the study by Olaf Blanke, I tried the link in our discussion but kept getting an error page, do you have an alternative or direct link? I would like to compare his findings and approach to those of

3889:

However, just recently, I was cited as an enabler of illegitimate power relations in an academic paper due to my attempt a few years ago to mediate disputes on the Free Will article between FF and a newer user. (See the post above yours on my wall.)

1482:

Hi Solar, Sorry for the delay in responding. I was away at the Society for Neuroscience conference in Atlanta. Did you mean the link to his lab website? I double checked the link, and it seemed to work, but just in case, give it a try like this:

916:(a recent medical FA). You mix referencing styles, with some Harvard style inlines, and other footnotes. You have only three notes, which aren't necessarily reliable sources. You need to incorporate one style for all of your inline citations. 963:

So, in terms of how to proceed from here, I recommend that you read everything above and get all that preliminary work done, then ask for help from the medical projects, and then, last, list it at peer review (which isn't always very helpful) -

3238:

edits that link up every single one of these users yet again. Will I translude the report onto the main sockpuppet reports page when I'm done or should we wait for the other editor's reply in case they have something to add before translusion.

3002:

I was thinking the exact same thing and I was going to comment on it while Pokegirl was still on the noticeboard but then they were blocked before I could click "save page". To see if they are the same person/same IP it would be best to make a

1693: 2369:

TV example: somehow, he was able to "hear" the beams, and then translate that into visual information. I didn't want to go *too* far out into gobbledygook sci-fi with this, so the tone-color synesthetic example is quite useful to know about.

3111:, so it might be best to name that user the "suspected sockpuppeteer" in the report assuming he was the first one and name the others the "suspected sockpuppets". If I find anything indicating other possible sockpuppets, I'll let you know . 4620:

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to

1407:

But I needed to vent the frustration somewhere. Thanks for understanding and responding. I will obviously try to stick to politeness and reasoning on the talk page of the article and I have deleted the angry outburst from my own talk page.

3522:

Hm.....reminds me, too, of the nutty Aldous Huxley and the doors of perception. "Your brain was in warped, defective state, old boy, you saw nonsense and experienced a DISTORTED reality!! That's why they are called mind-altering drugs. "

385:

I'll look over the other articles we've been working on as well. Usually I have to be away from an article for a day or two before I can do a good copyedit, to get a bit of distance. If you haven't read it yet, I highly recommend reading

1817:"Some theorists adopt the stance that any given philosophy is merely a reflection of the way that a person is socially embedded in a certain culture. To put it in Hegel's terms, "Philosophy is that which grasps its own era in thought."" 644:

Okay, fair enough. Making spelling consistent within an article is a good thing to do, so it wasn't all a waste of time. Sorry for the confusion! BTW, you can link to a section of an article like this ]. You don't need the whole URL.

4098:

prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the

689:, and do ask if he can get that article added to a vandal bot. It gets hit similar to the way TS gets hit. Also, whenever you revert one of them, be sure to add {{subst:test2}} ~~~~ warning template 2 to the user's talk page. 4658:

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in

920:. Your inline cites would be better converted to the cite:php mechanism for footnotes (see TS). Even though Harvard style references are accepted, in practice, most medical articles on Wiki are moving towards the other format. 481:

Thanks. Credit goes to other people as well, of course. Hopefully, it really does reflect the highest quality information and writing on Wiki, though I can still subtantial room for improvement on the first score. In any case,

3818:

That's exactly what it was, Keith must've really felt he owed Russert homage to make it the anniversary of his death his number 1 (I think) story, most news reporters wouldn't usually report on anyone's death after the fact.

663:

rate, a vandal bot wouldn't pick up the addition of "stub" anyway, so having lots of eyes watching it with you may help (I'll add it to my watchlist, but if you ever need help, let me know). I suggest that you make a post to

3839:

I saw your bear userbox on your userpage...do you happen to know of one about ducks? One that says "ducks are godless disgusting perverted creatures borne from the pit of hell?" Because it's totally true; everyone knows it.

4221:

Hi DC, no problem. I'll strike my "drive-by" comment from the talk, since now I see that it was motivated by a bigger discussion of vanity bio. Actually, that's an interesting thought. Perhaps we can get people on the

2975:

Thanks Kerotan. Hopefully, some other people will get involved on the free will page to help keep it up to FA quality. It's incidents like what's happening with LoveMonkey that drove one of our best philosophy editors,

3759:

Many thanks for rounding out "The Man Who" page, Ed. Not sure why User:shirt58 put up the British edition, which is out of print. I've uploaded the MIT cover, Shape-MIT.jpg. I'll put the pub details in a book infobox on

4254:

I have three issues with your definition. One is the use of "mind" rather than "brain", the second is the narrow scope (regarding "intelligence"), and the third is insistence that cognitive science studies machines.

4261:

I feel more strongly that we really ought to move to a broader scope, for instance making readers aware that cognitive science also studies emotion. The "cognitive" doesn't just mean thinking about abstract things.

2712:

course, "Spinoza's god" (most interpret as pantheism but not all) is itself something that would need to be clarified.It's terminologically and categorially confounding, but that's Einstein for you. So what's new? --

1679:

Hello. I just have a quick question. Does the majority of evidence point to Homo floresiensis being Homo sapiens suffering from Microcephaly? Or does it point to a new sub species? Edhubbard (3:00, 22 November 2006)

2055:

has just been listed for peer review. You are invited to lend your editing eyes to see if it needs any modifications, great or small, before it is submitted to the Featured Article review. Then head on over to the

2457:

does exactly that, and is intended to be a primary source. Knowledge (XXG) does have many encyclopedia articles on topics of historical significance that are currently in the news, and can be updated with recent

4481:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose 1388:. Since then, he has contributed nothing to any other pages, and has simply argued in unreferenced, OR, POV fasion for his views... as I said, a troll. I won't feed him unless he starts to touch the article. 2058: 270:

when none of those articles even mention mind wandering. Generalized linking like that in not appropriate in this situation. Likewise, your link is to a APS Symposium page that does not mention mind wandering.

769: 326:

Hi Ed. Just to say that I have started up some discussion on your Psychology Wiki page. I am away til the weekend now, but if you have a look at it and give me your views I can pick up with you when I get

3071:

I could help write the report. It should be a lot easier to do considering all of the known suspected sockpuppets are blocked and then if more come along we could add them to the report as they arrive.

254:

However, APS is not the APA -- it's the group of experimental psychologists that split off and formed its own association in the 1980's or so because it felt APA was too focused on clinical psychology.

4353: 3511:

and experienced some bizarre sensations of universal oneness with the toilet, the people in the world, and so on. (Actually, as am aside, I have these sorts of experiences all the time, but whenever

125:

Thanks. I think that's one of the cool things about wikipedia; that people come here because they care about gaining and sharing knowledge. With the amount of stuff out there, we're all experts on

3313:

It was lovely working with you too. I'll keep an eye on those articles for the next few hours and the other eye on the report in case someone else has a new revelation or our little friend returns.

3036:? That's where the long-term stuff like this gets handled. I don't know if they'll block the IP, but the regulars there would have more strategies to deal with it—certainly moreso than gets done at 3299:

Great. I think that's taken care of. Nice working with you (as nice as something like that can be!). That probably will be all of my wikicontributions for the day :-( Gotta do some real work!

3893:

I can't help but feel that this place is the embodiment of all the worst things about academia, which is itself rampant with its own tragic vices. So I probably won't be able to help. Good luck.

544:. A team of four of us have essentially rewritten an article that had three tags (expert, clean-up, unreferenced) into one that is getting to be GA quality. In addition to the work on the main 3007:

and then it would be up to the deciding admins to decide whether to block the IP for some time. But I have the most vandalised pages on my watchlist incase our little friend decides to return.

1437:

I don't know the topic well enough to provide perspective, but if unsourced OR is being inserted, I'll revert. I hope you all will keep track of the "last, best version" if it deteriorates.

888: 1860:

The silver lining is, any arguements therein were on the Talk page :D And any opinions I may or may not have portrayed are reconstructions of other articles simple copied and pasted. LOL

3269:

Ok, Sandy has enough on her plate already. I'd say we're ready to submit. If you want to transclude, I'll start adding the template to the user pages (they're all blocked, but anyway).

251:

The article has potential but it needs work to tie things together into an overall point. Maybe as you continue to work on it, it will become clearer to you what you are trying to say.

4230:

page, you might also want to give your opinion on the image, but if you feel like commenting on the image would confuse the issues you were bringing up in the original conversation on

895: 1513:

OBE state. In fact he conceded the possibility of the objective out-of-body experience, stating many more studies should be carried out. Unfortunately he chose to bias his article in

4408: 1001:

Thanks - I'll leave a note later today at that Project. The only means I have of knowing which projects to notify are those that are linking to the article. Thanks for the help !

3550: 4719:

to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

541:

been doing something productive, and I find this comment insulting and ill-informed. Compare the synesthesia page now, with the one that I arrived to see just under a month ago

2895:. There have been several comments at on the writing, but no one has really thoroughly evaluated the accuracy. Any help you could offer would be very much appreciated. Thanks, 1850:

I was easily able to out-discuss most of the editors who rejected simple clarification - from simple words, to concepts, but now, I've come across an editor with some friends.

1348:

to do one of two things 1) respond with a massive outbruft of raging hostility 2) abandond Wackipedia again and leave a note on my userpage with an image of my middle finger. --

728:, which will stop anonymous users from editing the article. As you have done, placing a warning on the IP's talk page is the right thing to do. In the case of 137.73.22.142, 1487:

If you still have troubles, let me know, and I'll try to figure out what's going on. Maybe his site was just down when you tried? I'll also post this to your talk page.

675:

is the admin who helped me on TS, so that would be another thing to try. (In fact, now that I think of it, try asking him first: he was very helpful on the TS article).

2884: 4540: 3128: 598:. In the end, this led us to decide to move the page from synaesthesia to synesthesia, which I did last night. Along with the move, I read the following instructions: 4575:. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license. 3961:

User: Goodmanman was trying to be a good editor and have you guys provide a source, but you took it a little too far. He was only trying to help...Watch it next time.(

2179:

My apologies - what you ended up doing to attention is what I would have liked to do anyway, but didn't realize there was a better way. Thanks for fixing my mistake.

2789:

I haven't explained the consequences of synthetic biology, so it is understandable why you'd think that synthetic biology does not impact Midgley's arugment greatly.

3687:, which is tucked into the templates at the top of the page. I found it by placing "Talk:Homo_floresiensis" in our search, you can also find 'hidden pages' by using 1814:

Therefore, your arguements do not correlate with philosophy nor does the fundamental Knowledge (XXG) principles have anything to do with my additions besides you.

3444:

I removed "omnivorous" because it seemed to me to be intended to imply that H.sapiens is not omnivorous. Maybe I'm just overly alert for militant vegetarianism.

4587: 1801:

of how one should live (ethics); what sorts of things exist and what are their essential natures (metaphysics); what counts as genuine knowledge (epistemology);

1381:

article than on anything else. Apparently he came to the free will article, shortly after he posted his particular view that "Compatibilism makes sense" on the

441: 4535:

because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the

4154:

appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important

1640:

Ed. If a ref to a single direct quote from an official source is OR then all of Knowledge (XXG) is OR. This does not make sense. Be Bold is the slogan, surely.

4714: 4648: 4258:

The use of "mind", I can maybe accept - some people are opposed to talking about brains unless neurotransmitters are involved - but it sounds terribly dated.

4226:

project to weigh in on the image thing. I don't feel like it's inappropriate, but more opinions might make things clearer. As a previous contributor to the

1826:

Unbias doesn't neccessarily mean unlogical. Is that not the goal of a philosophys' logical principal/thought/concept/aminoacids: to provide clarity/reason?--

1218: 234:

color synesthesia. There could hypothetically have been loads of more citations to him having synaesthesia, without there being another independant source..

1998:

You alright there guaiyo'? What happened? I'm finally up and running in broad-band and everything (and eveyone) seems dead!! You quit the show or what? --

1775:

Hey there - do you think you can coax an update out of someone on the FAR? The two-week review period is just about up, and we've had no recent feedback.

4057:

Hey, there are still some "determined will" pages I cannot delete, but they are redundant if we are going to stick to the Neuroscience of free will page.

532:

D'oh! I wish somebody had pointed this guideline out to me about 120 edits ago! Let's start with Keenan's last comment, and work backwards from there...

2652:

Yeah, I know... It looks like he's trying to contest the block now, or more precisely, take Orbis down with him. I'm tempted to raise this little edit

2130: 1866: 1171: 147:

The problem, as you are aware, is that there are some people – or at least one or two solid fans – who keep wanting to see Pharrell’s name in the list.

2211:

and make sure the definitions are accurate and appropriate. It looks good to me, but your expertise would be appreciated. Thanks very much in advance.

4412: 4357: 3554: 2553: 4812: 4668: 725: 979:

an article, which then employs summary style? A list is a list: I used an article, and then summarized important text back to the main article.

948:: have a look at the guidelines there. If the title of the article is repeated in the section headings, there's a problem in the section headings. 519: 1919:

PS: sorry for the extreme sloppiness, but I'm still on this 56 connecetion which lasts for two minutes and I don't have time to type carefully. --

299:

scientific, clinical, and academic profession versus all this pop psychology stuff. It's one thing after another. Sorry if I was overly prickly.

4578:

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

1420:

Adding Free will to my watchlist: I'll periodically try to make sure damage isn't done, but I might not know the "good" stuff from the "bad".

387: 4676: 295:

I apoligize to you about mindwandering indeed being on the APS page. My search had not incluced all three versions of the term you are using.

2423: 278:

Insomnia, attention-deficit etc. perhaps are more relevant and gets you into the medical, neurological and neuropsychological literature.

4506: 3371: 1631:

syndromes you mention do fit the DSM - "what everybody else believes" clearly means "everybody else who has an opinion on the matter" :-)

419:

BTW, since you are at it, any references you can add for the science section (there are basically none at all) would be helpful. Thanks. --

4416: 4361: 3558: 4602:, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter 3983: 3451: 184:

anyone who has a wikipedia entry famous enough for our wikipedia list. What do you think? (ps: I'll copy this to your talk page, too)

3406:

I'm getting called a relgious bigot by the Sam Harris folks, and an ignoramus about Buddhism by the theosophical chap. What NONSENSE.

2888: 2877: 2013: 1673:(moved from main page to talk page) Sir, I apologize for deleting an article. It was not done with malice. Have a Happy Thanksgiving. 721: 1870: 557: 477:

Hey, Just saw the star on Putnam! Congratulations! You deserve a lot of credit for everything you did to make that a Featured Article.

4532: 4147: 4083: 2077:

that these phrases simply originated from someone(s) with a gift for metaphor, and were picked up as part of the language? Thanks. —

3491:

and self-contradictory non-reductive "emergence", I am proud to declare that I am now a true reductive physicalist. Kim is right!!--

1382: 620:

Believing it was my responsibility to make sure that links point where they were supposed to, I spent three hours that I would have

4816: 4710: 4104: 884: 216:

hello, i've tried to find some written source for Pharrell, i'm pretty sure there isn't one; atleast not on the internet. googling

4082:

Welcome to Knowledge (XXG). Although one of the core policies of Knowledge (XXG) is that articles should always be written from a

4706: 4045: 2142: 1517:

and not mention this. This reveals that Blanke is in a similar position to Persinger, although Persinger has already worked with

565: 353:

You'd probably be much more qualified to work on the professional history of Ramachandran, but I'll help where I'm able. I think

16:

In the "Demonstrating the Reality of Synesthesia" section of the "Synesthesia" article, a cite is given to "Beeli et al., 2006".

4652: 4644: 3935: 4502: 4389: 4143: 1071:

at creating an encyclopedia in the original sense; a compedium of the totality of human knowledge, which is a very worthy goal.

2819:

to be written for a general audience, and could use substiantial copyediting. The lead does not conform to the guidelines at

4536: 4528: 3430: 2725: 2680:

Einstein was not an atheist. He didn't believe in a personal God. However, he never clearly said anything about his views on

2384:

hi there. urm i'm not sure if this is really done on wikipedia (i'm pretty new to editting at the moment) but i'll go ahead.

1650:

suggested alternative text. If I have you might either insert mine or indicate your agreement on the talk page. Many thanks.

850:

How does one go about getting a peer review on an article. My main project, along with a few others has been to improve the

4804: 4756: 4734: 4100: 4095: 3219:'s talk page about the SSP report, since she was one of the people attacked, and perhaps she can add her own evidence, too. 1810:

philosophy (we must remember Plato was born when foolishness like Gods of Wine and such existed) isn't highly potentiated.

742: 80: 22:

Beeli, Gian, Michaela Esslen, and Lutz Jäncke. 2005. "When coloured sounds taste sweet." Nature; vol. 434; 3 March: 38.

2221:

Thanks for your input. With a little research following your references, I think we'll be able to improve the entry a bit.

584:

work has begun to attract others, who, for example have created a category tag for our "impressive collection of articles"

4211: 2633:

Good intentions, but this was a particularly obstinate one, so off with the kid gloves and on with the brass knuckles! --

2464: 732:

shows that it belongs to a school or university, so the same student may not actually get the warning message and respond.

553: 4808: 4672: 4630: 3517: 2442: 1500:

Thanks, I did manage to find it via a web search, as you say the server must have been down when I tried. Thanks again -

3032:

and her (sic) apparent previous incarnations. Can you write up a sockpuppetry case describing the sequence of edits for

2860:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Synesthesia&curid=219963&diff=186411665&oldid=186386758#CITEREFDay2005

1223: 984: 463: 4493:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

3943: 2655:, which I originally didn't appreciate as vandalism. I think he might not be as newbie as his edit history suggests. 4765: 4498: 3577:

the problems, but a while ago I noticed at the archive of the Joel's talk page that you decided to try an easier way.

549: 2762: 4791: 1358:

Yeah, I just saw that... Sorry to take so long to respond, but I had a research day that made me think about giving

61: 4637: 4385: 2509:

how does one go about blocking people who have removed warnings after they were warned doing that got you blocked?

2191:

Thanks for reverting my changes, I would have gotten to it eventually but now I don't have to. Much appreciated.

569: 3718: 3706:

Agree, it was a malformed statement: because of the ongoing controversy, in the media and elsewhere, the article

3693: 3666: 3655: 3635: 3614: 3426: 1969:

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Knowledge (XXG)'s

672: 4155: 4139: 4091: 745:

does not apply to senseless vandalism like this (and applies to a 24 hour period anyhow). Hope that helps :-) --

703: 88: 4752: 4738: 4207: 3789: 3380: 3355: 3319: 3289: 3245: 3190: 3159: 3117: 3078: 3013: 2409:

article from Yale blue and California gold to simply blue and gold. Aren't you going to do something about it?

2017: 1330: 172:

Pharrell Williams fan page we can search through?) then the ABC quote is nice because it is publicly available.

3761: 228:

to see if there was any transcript of the interview; but that only gave 4 results none of which were relevant.

218:"pharrell williams" synesthesia OR synaesthesia -"one half" -afi -playlist -records -Thrillseekers -Downstair 3987: 3908: 3598: 3582: 3566: 3455: 3341: 3184:

other articles the s.sockpuppets have been editing would also need to be mentioned - all of which I can do.

1151: 4285: 4033: 3979: 3447: 2803: 3911:, users (even anons) are allowed to remove warnings and old blocks but not ISP-info and similar tags. See 3845: 3234:

Sounds good. I have added the threat/personal attacks diffs to the report, now I just have to add the odd

2775: 2314: 1874: 1827: 1783: 1765: 1277: 1156: 1141: 1131: 595:

In the course of all this work, we standardized our spelling on the modern American spelling, synesthesia

4820: 4494: 4108: 2761:

that someone had removed. I re-removed it, because as far as I can tell this syndrome doesn't exist. See

2449:. Knowledge (XXG) should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories. Knowledge (XXG) is not a 1843:

I've studied under you from other names, maybe you remember 1 (Warpath), but I got banned under that 1.

92: 4610: 4451: 4424: 4369: 4293: 4274: 3345: 1241: 1121: 57: 4583: 3912: 2736: 76: 953:

I didn't look at your article content, since I know nothing of your area, but I recommend you look at

522:

and stop changing ] to ]. I know you're trying to help, but please, do something productive instead. —

4571: 4332: 4062: 4041: 3863: 3531: 3496: 2950: 2844: 2829: 2138: 1319: 1126: 788: 746: 686: 4603: 4470: 4461: 4198:

Ed, I believe I am inadvertently responsible for the recent changes to Richard Cytowic's image. See

3976:

Ahh...sorry i didn't realize i was adding the old system for nascar...sorry about that...stupid me

2519:

You are the one doing the harassing, vandalizing a user page, and violating 3rr in a couple places:

2098:

I was hoping you might be able to explain what cause the following optical illusion. If you look at

940:, and also refer to the above article on writing medical articles. You might try to pare that down. 3871: 3824: 3808: 3785: 3375: 3367: 3350: 3314: 3284: 3240: 3185: 3154: 3112: 3073: 3008: 2552:

Hi Fyslee, I'm not an admin, so I can't, but if this continues, I will be reporting him/her to the

2492: 2109: 2084: 2051: 1554:

I think that sounds great! I'd be happy to read your philoblog. Wanna send me the link (off wiki)?

1176: 4490: 4474: 4199: 1980:

If you do not want to receive bot-generated messages on your talk page, please consider using the

4159: 4120: 3594: 3578: 3562: 3471: 3108: 3090: 2867: 2754: 2685: 2510: 2323: 2162: 1747: 1521:

and clearly supports psi as a reality. I thought this might be of interest to you, Best wishes -

1282: 792: 646: 573: 561: 523: 310: 282: 3093:? I first saw him on the Kyle Busch page, but there might be parents earlier than that. Cheers 1970: 4146:. One of the core policies of Knowledge (XXG) is that articles should always be written from a 3753: 3255:

Excellent. Thanks! I'd say let's wait just a little longer to see what others may have to add.

2020:, along with discussing ways to improve the article. Hope you're interested. Have a great day! 605:

You are responsible for making sure that links continue to point where they are supposed to go.

110:

about the synesthesia page, and i'll check out your cleanups as soon as i finish writing this.

4787: 4724: 4684: 4548: 4349: 3966: 3951: 3841: 3769: 3749: 3546: 3216: 2967: 2921: 2902: 2797: 2767: 2294: 1776: 1758: 1469: 1447: 1438: 1421: 1272: 1259: 1191: 1032: 1023: 1013: 1002: 988: 969: 909: 899: 773: 758: 690: 676: 263: 235: 4486: 4478: 4175: 2820: 2605: 1601:

looks extremely interesting. But I am not competent to contribute. You might be interested.--

4447: 4420: 4365: 4289: 4270: 4183: 4163: 4124: 4011: 4003: 3920: 3627: 3475: 3047: 2695: 2642: 2582: 2538: 1246: 1186: 1161: 4774: 4489:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 4482: 4223: 3037: 3033: 2961:

article, and anything which goes on at length and is overly wordy is rather unproductive.--

2434: 1754: 1605: 945: 933: 925: 668: 664: 4325: 4227: 4151: 4087: 4058: 4037: 3803:

Didn't mean for the Tim Russert page to look like vandalism. Sorry about the confusion. --

3527: 3492: 3410: 3029: 2977: 2946: 2840: 2825: 2713: 2608:

the newbie, but it's obvious that he's/she's going strong to make friends around here ;-)

2496: 2478: 2410: 2344: 2166: 2148: 2134: 1999: 1981: 1974: 1958: 1932: 1920: 1892: 1602: 1567: 1545: 1409: 1349: 1334: 1295: 1100: 1052: 913: 729: 505: 487: 420: 328: 111: 4231: 4203: 4116: 4112: 3004: 2943: 2290:? Glad you like it. The edit summary is a neglected miniature art form, in my opinion. – 1962: 1853:

My question is: how do you view wikipedia presently and am I wrong to stick to my guns?

965: 937: 4665:

Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged

4311: 3684: 898:. I resisted the overly-disease-oriented format there at first, but once I used it for 4235: 4086:, we would like to remind you not to undo other people's edits, as you did to the page 3867: 3820: 3804: 3470:

I think it would be more convenient to talk via email (write to drobnik @ onet . pl). (

3300: 3270: 3256: 3220: 3170: 3132: 3094: 3058: 2981: 2699: 2656: 2609: 2557: 2450: 2392: 2104: 2079: 2063: 1555: 1488: 1389: 1364: 1323: 1228: 1084: 869: 858: 632: 449: 185: 130: 84: 38: 4773:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge (XXG) are appreciated, pages may be

3930: 3518:

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html

2883:

Hey Ed, I wondered if I could ask a favor. I noticed you're the only active expert at

2459: 303: 3894: 2914:

Thanks again for taking the time to do such a detailed review, I sure appreciate it.

2863: 2740: 2732: 2391:

anyway i would be extremely grateful for any advice you could give me, best regards

2370: 2359: 2318: 2036: 1738: 1206: 891:. Neurology isn't necessarily their forte, but some of them are willing to help out. 826: 812: 796: 453: 401: 370: 307: 279: 2208: 4824: 4720: 4680: 4544: 3962: 3947: 3856: 3765: 3745: 2962: 2915: 2896: 2793: 2099: 1822: 1116: 1076: 501: 396: 358: 354: 343: 267: 2779: 2240:

to bed now, but if I have any more questions, I'll get back to you. Thanks again.

1973:. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the 983:

uses a list (and a featured one): it gives you a sample of how that can be done.

486:

think it's a pretty nice article and I put a lot of work and knowledge into it. --

3521:

Bolt Taylor goes into altered state and says that she has found truth </a: -->

1711:

to neuroscientific topics and your work on the Out-of-Body Experience article. -

158:

Incidentally, I'm quite okay with keeping Pharrell on the "being reviewed" list.

4623: 4599: 4179: 4007: 3916: 3042: 2942:

is discouraged. Do that sort of thing again, and someone is going to invoke the

2635: 2575: 2531: 2406: 2204:

the article that I tagged just one year ago with the version that stands today.

1840:"Jurplesman, sorry to talk to you here, but I can't send a PM for some reason. 1794:

which needs to be reference - but only correlations between logic and language.

1734: 1730: 1651: 1641: 1632: 1617: 1300: 1196: 1166: 851: 843: 577: 545: 96: 4651:

justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See

1950: 526: 3150: 3146: 2892: 2277: 2266: 2255: 2241: 2231: 2222: 2212: 1712: 1585: 1522: 1518: 1501: 1473: 707: 631:

avoided the redirect, but made the spelling style consistent within the page.

362: 259: 205: 162: 29: 3736:

down. But how is putting up a lecture that I had filmed myself a violation?

2604:

Thanks. I was just writing a reply to his question, trying to help, and not

4439: 4404: 2523:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:ConfuciusOrnis&action=history

1863:

The article is Philosophy of Mind. Can you help me in any way, Jurplesman."

1692: 1378: 1254: 1136: 445: 390:, its a well written essay on copyediting that I've found to be very useful. 1616:

perfect example of a 19th C argument that was really killed in the 20th C.

4597:

Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to

4178:. You may also want to do a google scholar search on this user's name. -- 4111:

among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek

1063:

I assume you have my page on your watch list, now, too so I'll reply here.

918:(Don't forget to employ PubMed links -- again, see TS and cystic fibrosis) 3169:

Yes, thannks. You're right. At least the diffs go to the right place :-)

3057:

I'd be happy to, but I can't quite figure out how to do it on that page!

2454: 2192: 2182: 2021: 1201: 980: 968:. Let me know if you need any further guidance: this is just a start. 437: 350:

diagrams and formatting for wiki-consistency, so I'll keep up with that.

4698: 4520: 4135: 4078: 2343:

once-in-a-lifetime opportunity!! but I will not insist on the matter. --

1103:

predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

1031:

I'm patient, but today my thick skin suit has been worn a little thin.

520:

Knowledge (XXG):Redirect#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken

83:, because that's the encyclopedic part of the Knowledge (XXG) website. 4829: 4728: 4688: 4552: 4510: 4477:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge (XXG)

4455: 4428: 4393: 4373: 4335: 4297: 4278: 4243: 4215: 4187: 4167: 4128: 4066: 4049: 4015: 3991: 3970: 3955: 3924: 3897: 3875: 3849: 3828: 3812: 3793: 3773: 3722: 3697: 3688: 3670: 3659: 3639: 3618: 3602: 3586: 3570: 3535: 3500: 3479: 3459: 3434: 3385: 3360: 3324: 3308: 3294: 3278: 3264: 3250: 3235: 3228: 3195: 3178: 3164: 3140: 3122: 3102: 3083: 3066: 3051: 3018: 2989: 2970: 2954: 2927: 2908: 2871: 2848: 2833: 2807: 2743: 2716: 2702: 2688: 2659: 2647: 2612: 2587: 2560: 2543: 2513: 2499: 2495:. I won't insist much on the edit but would like to hear your opinion. 2481: 2413: 2395: 2373: 2362: 2347: 2329: 2297: 2280: 2269: 2258: 2244: 2234: 2225: 2215: 2185: 2169: 2151: 2066: 2039: 2024: 2002: 1935: 1923: 1895: 1878: 1830: 1787: 1769: 1741: 1715: 1654: 1644: 1635: 1620: 1588: 1570: 1558: 1548: 1525: 1504: 1491: 1476: 1450: 1441: 1424: 1412: 1392: 1367: 1352: 1337: 1311:

Your contributions make Knowledge (XXG) better -- thanks for helping.

1264: 1087: 1055: 1035: 1026: 1016: 1005: 991: 972: 872: 861: 829: 815: 799: 776: 761: 749: 693: 679: 649: 635: 508: 490: 456: 423: 404: 373: 331: 313: 285: 238: 208: 188: 165: 133: 114: 99: 65: 41: 32: 1753:

Hey, there -- are you aware that Philosophy of mind just showed up at

1563: 932:

You have what is referred to as a "link farm" in External links; see

2758: 1961:, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring 1836:

I'll play dirty 2. Jurplesman is for real and he don't take nonsense.

1181: 1146: 867:

Striking through comments below as completing; not trying to disagree

548:

article, I have created several synesthesia related pages, including

87:, however, is all yours to use more or less as you wish. Please see 3416:

You'd have to make an account, nut that takes about a minute or so.

3397: 2016:

to get together and rate the both the quality and importance of the

1329:

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on

770:

Knowledge (XXG):Featured article review/Omnipotence paradox/archive1

275:

inappropriate references to psychology in Knowledge (XXG) articles.

1598: 596: 588: 585: 500:

Hi. Just to let you know that I have continued our conversation on

2287: 1236: 220:, leaves only 30-something.. and none of them seem to be relevant. 4694:

File:48-24atSonyHD500CaliforniaSpeedway.jpg listed for discussion

2123:

If you haven't seen it already, here's a series you might enjoy:

587:

and offered their unsolicited praise for the changes to the page

4443: 1374:

To illustrate just what a troll he is, look at his edit history

806:

BTW, how did you come to be interested in the synesthesia pages?

3145:

Ok. I'll see what I can do :). Also I'm fairly sure it was the

4103:. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to 3215:(resetting) That would be great. I've also left a message on 2439: 1290: 889:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Medicine/Collaboration of the Week

2207:

That done with, I'd like to invite you to take a look at the

887:, and post a request for help on their talk page. Ditto for 504:. Sorry for the delay in replying but I have been thinking!!! 4743: 4697: 4561: 4519: 3866:, since you know more about this dispute that I do. Cheers. 3040:. Thank you, good catch of the pattern, and happy editing! — 1046:

Knowledge (XXG) is something more than a General Encylopedia

955:] and in particular, Tony's page at the bottom of that page. 4616:

to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

4411:. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 4356:. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 3553:. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 3107:

Ok sure. :) I haven't seen any other s.sockpuppets before

2062:

and add your comments, if you are so inspired. Thank you!!

896:

Knowledge (XXG):Manual of Style (Medicine-related articles)

25:

Or is there another, later Beeli et al. I have overlooked?

1804:

and what are the correct PRINCIPLES of reasoning (logic)."

4543:

if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you.

2254:

Yes, I found it on JSTOR. I've sent it to you via email.

2529:

Edhubbard, please tame this person and/or block them.--

2491:

hi, i've started a section about the quote i removed at

1377:. He literally has more edits on the talk page for the 811:

looking up different psychiatric conditions in general.

4815:

process can result in deletion without discussion, and

4797:

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing

4660: 4516:

Possibly unfree File:JimmieJohnson2007NewYorkParade.jpg

3631: 3609: 3349:

and so some of them are blocking the accounts on sight.

2939: 2859: 2839:

Thanks for your sensitive edits. It's getting better.

2653: 2522: 1484: 1386: 1375: 1333:. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- 542: 4780:

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the

4655:

for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

2165:, if you have any time and desire to do so. Thanks. -- 2126: 908:

You need far better inline citations. Have a look at

787:

Hmm... Thinking about it, it might make sense to make

720:

If the problem persists you might consider requesting

537:

First, "do something prodcutive instead". In fact, I

4115:, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request 2885:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Neuroscience/Contributors

1941:

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

4024:

Regarding Neuroscience and the question of free will

1318:

on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on

4675:. If you have any questions please ask them at the 2161:I need help with another ++++++ who's crapping on 757:Hey, I noticed the vandal patrolling is working ! 4539:. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at 3764:'s talk page. Again, I appreciate all your effort 2938:Hey there, just to let you know, doing stuff like 2731:I see from the talk page comment that you left on 1401:Yes, I've calmed down substantially at this point. 4558:File permission problem with File:SteenVision.jpg 4469:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current 4107:to work towards wording and content that gains a 3711:toyed with the idea of suggesting a move to Homo 1797:"Philosophy is the discipline concerned with the 291:Mindwandering vs mind-wandering vs mind wandering 3283:I guess I better start transluding away then :) 3131:. Take a look and see if you have more to add. 1096:Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot 369:Anyway, look forward to working with you a bit! 79:is not the appropriate spot to post information 37:You're right, Sean. Thanks for the correction. 4629:If you believe the media meets the criteria at 3153:page. Is it ok if I change that in the report? 601: 129:, and we can share and learn from each other. 3402:and post a comment on a comment or something. 3028:Hey, it looks like you're onto a pattern with 1847:colaborations beforehand be imune to reform. 226:"Pharrell Williams" "weird colors" -"one half" 4324:For being an unflinchingly productive editor 3486:I switch sides......let the science prevail!! 2230:That would be great. I'll send you an email. 928:- External links and further reading go last. 8: 4645:Knowledge (XXG):File copyright tags#Fair use 4442:, you might be interested to participate in 3340:I added two more sockpuppets to the report: 1219:Attention versus memory in prefrontal cortex 905:In terms of items a peer review would note: 726:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for page protection 4707:File:48-24atSonyHD500CaliforniaSpeedway.jpg 3149:page the sockpuppets were changing not the 2554:Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard 2887:, and I'd love it if you could comment at 2358:able to see radio waves, or see the wind. 1948: 711:someone will spot vandalism and revert it. 448:article. I have added a suggestion in the 4671:. You may wish to read Knowledge (XXG)'s 4234:, feel free to sit it out, too. Cheers, 2824:to bring it back to an acceptable state. 2405:Someone changed the school colors at the 302:Just make sure you have good sources per 155:straight from Pharrell Williams himself. 4586:or another acceptable free license (see 2785:Eliminative materialism and Mary Midgley 346:has an unfortunately short bio as well. 4786:notice, but please explain why in your 4592:at the site of the original publication 4582:make a note permitting reuse under the 4529:File:JimmieJohnson2007NewYorkParade.jpg 2684:. Please see: einsteinandreligion.com. 1172:D-lysergic acid N-(α-hydroxyethyl)amide 944:Your section headings don't conform to 452:. I wonder if this makes it clearer? - 4142:to Knowledge (XXG), and thank you for 3664:..., but thank you for the gesture :) 1690: 783:Re: Cognition tag on synesthesia pages 388:User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a 380:its still thicker than it needs to be. 4705:A file that you uploaded or altered, 4533:Knowledge (XXG):Possibly unfree files 4527:A file that you uploaded or altered, 3730: 1446:Let me know whenever you need help. 7: 4711:Knowledge (XXG):Files for discussion 3938:other editors. If you continue, you 2753:I see you re-added the reference to 2698:discussion page, where it belongs. 885:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Medicine 685:Had a closer look: yes, do contact 4653:Knowledge (XXG):File copyright tags 4643:or one of the other tags listed at 1707:I award you this barnstar for your 4775:deleted for any of several reasons 4759:because of the following concern: 558:ordinal linguistic personification 436:Thanks for notification about the 416:haven't looked it over carefully. 411:Response about Neuro and Free will 14: 4800:{{proposed deletion/dated files}} 4783:{{proposed deletion/dated files}} 4495:review the candidates' statements 3731:Hi, and I'm a newbie at this code 3398:http://www.myspace.com/franco6719 2556:. It's clearly a problem here. 2014:members of the Psychology Project 1994:Say, what happened to EdHubbard?? 1593: 1540:have written. It would be called 1383:Compatibilism_and_incompatibilism 1105: 878:I can give you a couple of leads: 611:Move instructions, emphasis added 4631:Knowledge (XXG):Non-free content 4310: 4134: 4077: 3929: 1949: 1691: 1531:I have created a philosophy blog 566:American Synesthesia Association 247:Article does look better --- but 4090:, without explaining why in an 3946:from editing Knowledge (XXG). ( 3413:(]) 15:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC) 2345:Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 2167:Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 2149:Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 2000:Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 1955: 1933:Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 1921:Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 1893:Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 488:Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 421:Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 306:and there will be no problem. 47:The cortical basis of synthesia 4677:Media copyright questions page 4501:. For the Election committee, 4471:Arbitration Committee election 4462:ArbCom elections are now open! 4374:13:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC) 3370:. Blocked for vandalism after 2726:Dissociative identity disorder 2453:. However, our sister project 1088:16:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC) 1056:14:06, 29 September 2006 (UTC) 1036:22:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC) 1027:21:49, 27 September 2006 (UTC) 1017:17:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC) 1006:12:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC) 992:19:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC) 973:18:21, 14 September 2006 (UTC) 873:21:19, 27 September 2006 (UTC) 862:17:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC) 777:17:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC) 1: 4606:. If you take this step, add 4511:13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC) 4150:. A contribution you made to 4105:discuss controversial changes 4016:21:15, 13 December 2009 (UTC) 3992:02:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 3971:02:31, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 3956:02:31, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 3925:02:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 3683:Neither could I! The link is 3603:12:38, 11 February 2009 (UTC) 3587:00:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC) 2735:'s page that you agreed that 2717:09:17, 1 September 2007 (UTC) 2424:Hitchen's on death of Fallill 2209:Wiktionary Synaesthesia entry 2145:) 10:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC). 2040:11:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC) 2025:14:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC) 2003:11:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC) 1742:18:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 1716:13:49, 24 November 2006 (UTC) 1655:22:03, 19 November 2006 (UTC) 1645:10:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC) 1636:17:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC) 1621:23:35, 12 November 2006 (UTC) 821:Good luck with your A-levels! 554:lexical-gustatory synesthesia 357:is in pretty good shape, but 4830:04:53, 15 January 2023 (UTC) 4669:criteria for speedy deletion 4429:22:16, 6 February 2012 (UTC) 4409:featured article review here 4394:13:42, 3 November 2011 (UTC) 4354:featured article review here 3571:20:08, 2 February 2009 (UTC) 3551:featured article review here 2928:08:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC) 2909:10:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC) 2872:01:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC) 2849:11:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC) 2834:11:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC) 2808:01:46, 18 October 2007 (UTC) 2780:15:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC) 1936:10:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC) 1924:11:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC) 1896:09:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC) 1788:23:26, 4 February 2007 (UTC) 1770:02:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC) 1606:16:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC) 1589:20:42, 28 October 2006 (UTC) 1571:07:44, 20 October 2006 (UTC) 1559:23:08, 19 October 2006 (UTC) 1549:12:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC) 1526:11:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC) 1505:23:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC) 1492:23:13, 19 October 2006 (UTC) 1477:17:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC) 1224:List of NLP-related articles 985:List of people with epilepsy 89:Knowledge (XXG):Introduction 4819:allows discussion to reach 4766:File:Galton number form.svg 4553:21:45, 8 January 2016 (UTC) 4497:and submit your choices on 4298:09:14, 17 August 2010 (UTC) 4279:09:11, 17 August 2010 (UTC) 4002:Please enter discussion at 3536:11:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC) 3501:10:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC) 3024:Pokegirl14 and sockpuppetry 1451:21:50, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1442:21:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1425:21:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1413:07:10, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 1393:21:23, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1368:21:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1353:15:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1338:18:23, 1 October 2006 (UTC) 1331:the SuggestBot request page 830:00:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC) 816:00:34, 26 August 2006 (UTC) 800:00:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC) 762:19:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC) 750:00:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC) 694:19:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC) 680:19:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC) 650:00:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC) 636:07:38, 23 August 2006 (UTC) 550:neural basis of synesthesia 527:00:44, 23 August 2006 (UTC) 509:11:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC) 491:06:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC) 457:22:39, 18 August 2006 (UTC) 424:15:20, 17 August 2006 (UTC) 405:19:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC) 374:04:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC) 239:04:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC) 4845: 4811:exist. In particular, the 4503:MediaWiki message delivery 4456:01:30, 27 April 2015 (UTC) 4067:22:05, 23 March 2010 (UTC) 4050:05:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC) 4004:User_talk:Penbat#Attention 3386:20:06, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3361:19:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3325:18:02, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3309:17:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3295:17:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3279:17:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3265:17:36, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3251:17:28, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3229:17:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3196:17:02, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3179:16:56, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3165:16:56, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3141:16:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3123:16:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3103:16:37, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3084:16:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3067:16:27, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3052:16:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 3019:16:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC) 2749:memory / wilson's syndrome 2744:16:22, 5 August 2007 (UTC) 2396:21:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC) 2374:16:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 2363:15:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 2348:14:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 2186:23:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC) 2170:09:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC) 2152:10:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC) 1879:19:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC) 1831:24:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC) 1326:, SuggestBot's caretaker. 1108: 570:grapheme-color synesthesia 395:As a GA reviewer, I think 332:11:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC) 314:23:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC) 286:22:52, 8 August 2006 (UTC) 209:20:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC) 189:20:08, 6 August 2006 (UTC) 166:18:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC) 134:11:32, 6 August 2006 (UTC) 115:07:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC) 100:13:33, 4 August 2006 (UTC) 66:23:55, 19 April 2012 (UTC) 42:08:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC) 4805:proposed deletion process 4753:File:GaltonNumberForm.png 4739:File:GaltonNumberForm.png 4689:21:41, 6 March 2016 (UTC) 4438:As a past contributor to 4413:featured article criteria 4358:featured article criteria 4309: 4288:to move things forward -- 4244:22:27, 31 July 2010 (UTC) 4216:21:28, 31 July 2010 (UTC) 3898:23:01, 28 July 2009 (UTC) 3850:16:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC) 3829:03:56, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 3813:02:20, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 3723:18:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC) 3698:17:18, 4 March 2009 (UTC) 3671:17:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC) 3660:17:08, 4 March 2009 (UTC) 3640:15:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC) 3619:15:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC) 3555:featured article criteria 3480:20:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC) 3460:18:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC) 3425:his error? Best regards, 2990:21:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC) 2971:21:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC) 2955:21:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC) 2878:WP:Peer review/Concussion 2703:12:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC) 2689:11:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC) 2660:22:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 2648:22:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 2613:22:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 2588:22:08, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 2561:22:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 2544:21:58, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 2514:21:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 2500:18:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC) 2482:10:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2330:23:09, 6 April 2007 (UTC) 2298:08:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2281:00:12, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 2270:23:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 2259:22:08, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 2245:10:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 2235:09:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 2226:08:34, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 2216:05:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 2067:20:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC) 1737:, I'll help as I'm able. 1697: 1212: 702:OK I have got someone on 673:User Talk:Commander Keane 464:edit counter opt-in terms 95:for more information. -- 93:Knowledge (XXG):User page 33:21:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC) 4729:15:01, 16 May 2016 (UTC) 4444:this Request for Comment 4336:03:54, 1 July 2011 (UTC) 4239: 3876:05:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC) 3794:16:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC) 3774:12:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC) 3762:The Man Who Tasted Shape 3754:23:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC) 3435:14:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 3304: 3274: 3260: 3224: 3174: 3136: 3098: 3062: 2985: 2748: 2018:Tree of Knowledge System 1594:Here's something for you 894:In particular, also see 4250:Definition of cognition 4188:01:39, 2 May 2010 (UTC) 4168:09:02, 1 May 2010 (UTC) 4129:04:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC) 3909:User talk:67.60.203.231 3342:User:Selldonutsatmydoor 2694:I've moved this to the 2414:09:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC) 2045:Request for peer review 1709:excellent contributions 1684:The Scientific Barnstar 1152:Charles Bonnet syndrome 1022:for a very long time. 442:featured article review 19:Is that the following? 4771: 4764:Unused, superseded by 4748: 4702: 4566: 4524: 2418: 2012:Hi. I'm trying to get 1984:on your user talk page 1828:User talk:InternetHero 1320:SuggestBot's talk page 1278:Database administrator 1157:Psychedelic literature 1142:Theory of descriptions 1132:Cognitive neuroscience 614: 576:and cleaned-up an old 514:Redirects aren't evil. 432:Free will and Tourette 4761: 4757:proposed for deletion 4747: 4709:, has been listed at 4701: 4569:Thanks for uploading 4565: 4537:file description page 4531:, has been listed at 4523: 4475:Arbitration Committee 4434:RfC on Talk:Free will 4386:OneThousandTwentyFour 4318:The Civility Barnstar 4148:neutral point of view 4084:neutral point of view 3835:Re: your bear userbox 3466:About my synaesthesia 3346:User:CutLilPuppyDog31 2573:He's blocked now. -- 2315:User:Robert P. O'Shea 2133:comment was added by 1869:comment was added by 1242:Reductive materialism 1122:Synesthesia (Buck 65) 568:, and contributed to 513: 4817:files for discussion 4792:the file's talk page 4633:, use a tag such as 4572:File:SteenVision.jpg 3427:ReluctantPhilosopher 3127:Should be filed now 2969:Have a nice day :) 2094:Color focus illusion 2072:Synesthesia question 1724:Re: Long time no see 1579:Neuroscience section 1485:http://lnco.epfl.ch/ 1127:Psychotic depression 789:Category:Synesthesia 687:User:Commander Keane 4479:arbitration process 4303:A barnstar for you! 4208:Delicious carbuncle 2998:Re:Series of socks? 2800:) 17 October 2007 2497:trespassers william 2493:talk:Daniel Dennett 2286:My edit summary at 2119:Something different 2114:• 2007-03-18 03:45Z 2089:• 2007-03-14 21:01Z 2052:Clinical psychology 1177:Hard and soft drugs 706:to add the article 462:-- I agree to the 4809:deletion processes 4749: 4703: 4667:, as described on 4567: 4525: 4491:arbitration policy 4144:your contributions 4113:dispute resolution 3903:User-page warnings 3766:Richard E. Cytowic 3746:Richard E. Cytowic 2419:You gotta' love it 2380:not really wiki... 2353:Strange request... 2163:philosophy of mind 1748:Philosophy of mind 1701:The E=MC2 Barnstar 1283:Bernard Parmegiani 793:Category:Cognition 724:of the article at 574:famous synesthetes 562:synesthesia in art 322:Started discussion 258:Also, you link to 4735:Proposed deletion 4713:. Please see the 4638:non-free fair use 4403:I have nominated 4350:Homo floresiensis 4348:I have nominated 4341: 4340: 4101:three-revert rule 4096:three-revert rule 4053: 4036:comment added by 3998:Attention article 3982:comment added by 3895:{ Ben S. Nelson } 3547:Homo floresiensis 3545:I have nominated 3541:Homo floresiensis 3462: 3450:comment added by 3440:Homo floresiensis 3401:there </a: --> 2926: 2907: 2810: 2755:Wilson's syndrome 2737:User:StandardName 2469: 2468: 2371:{ Ben S. Nelson } 2360:{ Ben S. Nelson } 2326: 2146: 2115: 2090: 1990: 1989: 1985: 1971:quality standards 1882: 1721: 1720: 1669:Homo floresiensis 1470:Michael Persinger 1463:Olaf Blanke Study 1308: 1307: 1273:Mood (psychology) 1260:Visual perception 1192:Stimulus modality 924:You don't follow 910:Tourette syndrome 900:Tourette syndrome 791:a subcategory of 337:Ramachandran help 264:cognitive science 139:Pharrell Williams 77:Edward M. Hubbard 71:Edward M. Hubbard 4836: 4827: 4823:for deletion. -- 4802: 4801: 4785: 4784: 4746: 4673:image use policy 4642: 4636: 4615: 4609: 4564: 4329: 4314: 4307: 4306: 4138: 4094:. Note that the 4081: 4052: 4030: 3994: 3933: 3721: 3696: 3669: 3658: 3638: 3617: 3528:Francesco Franco 3493:Francesco Franco 3445: 3411:Francesco Franco 3383: 3378: 3358: 3353: 3322: 3317: 3292: 3287: 3248: 3243: 3193: 3188: 3162: 3157: 3120: 3115: 3081: 3076: 3016: 3011: 3005:checkuser report 2978:Francesco Franco 2965: 2924: 2920: 2918: 2905: 2901: 2899: 2801: 2714:Francesco Franco 2696:List of atheists 2479:Francesco Franco 2440: 2324: 2293: 2128: 2112: 2103: 2087: 2078: 2059:peer review page 2030:Capgras Syndrome 1979: 1953: 1946: 1945: 1864: 1780: 1762: 1695: 1688: 1687: 1603:Francesco Franco 1568:Francesco Franco 1546:Francesco Franco 1410:Francesco Franco 1350:Francesco Franco 1247:Regress argument 1187:Up the Downstair 1162:Henriett Seth-F. 1106: 1053:Francesco Franco 842:Peer review for 612: 4844: 4843: 4839: 4838: 4837: 4835: 4834: 4833: 4825: 4813:speedy deletion 4799: 4798: 4782: 4781: 4744: 4742: 4696: 4661:your upload log 4640: 4634: 4613: 4607: 4562: 4560: 4518: 4499:the voting page 4465: 4436: 4401: 4381: 4379:University help 4346: 4327: 4305: 4252: 4228:Richard Cytowic 4196: 4152:Richard Dawkins 4117:page protection 4088:Richard Dawkins 4075: 4031: 4026: 4000: 3977: 3915:for more info. 3905: 3883: 3861: 3837: 3801: 3782: 3740:sort of thing. 3733: 3719:cygnis insignis 3717: 3694:cygnis insignis 3692: 3667:cygnis insignis 3665: 3656:cygnis insignis 3654: 3636:cygnis insignis 3634: 3615:cygnis insignis 3613: 3543: 3508: 3488: 3468: 3442: 3422: 3394: 3381: 3377:AngelOfSadness 3376: 3356: 3352:AngelOfSadness 3351: 3320: 3316:AngelOfSadness 3315: 3290: 3286:AngelOfSadness 3285: 3246: 3242:AngelOfSadness 3241: 3191: 3187:AngelOfSadness 3186: 3160: 3156:AngelOfSadness 3155: 3118: 3114:AngelOfSadness 3113: 3079: 3075:AngelOfSadness 3074: 3030:User:Pokegirl14 3026: 3014: 3010:AngelOfSadness 3009: 3000: 2963: 2936: 2922: 2916: 2903: 2897: 2881: 2857: 2816: 2787: 2751: 2729: 2678: 2507: 2489: 2474: 2432: 2421: 2403: 2382: 2355: 2340: 2306: 2304:Robyn Hitchcock 2291: 2265:article : ) 2201: 2177: 2159: 2129:—The preceding 2121: 2110: 2096: 2085: 2074: 2047: 2032: 2010: 1996: 1991: 1982:nobots template 1959:Autistic savant 1943: 1888: 1865:—The preceding 1778: 1760: 1751: 1726: 1686: 1671: 1662: 1628: 1613: 1596: 1581: 1533: 1465: 1345: 1322:. Thanks from 1296:Semantic memory 1098: 1048: 999: 914:Cystic fibrosis 883:Have a look at 848: 785: 747:Commander Keane 722:semi-protection 660: 613: 610: 516: 498: 496:Psychology wiki 474: 434: 413: 339: 324: 293: 249: 141: 107: 73: 58:Guywholikesca2+ 49: 12: 11: 5: 4842: 4840: 4803:will stop the 4741: 4732: 4695: 4692: 4618: 4617: 4595: 4559: 4556: 4541:the discussion 4517: 4514: 4468: 4464: 4459: 4435: 4432: 4400: 4397: 4380: 4377: 4345: 4342: 4339: 4338: 4321: 4320: 4315: 4304: 4301: 4286:this is useful 4283: 4251: 4248: 4247: 4246: 4195: 4192: 4191: 4190: 4074: 4071: 4070: 4069: 4025: 4022: 4020: 3999: 3996: 3904: 3901: 3882: 3879: 3860: 3853: 3836: 3833: 3832: 3831: 3800: 3797: 3786:Carlossuarez46 3781: 3778: 3777: 3776: 3732: 3729: 3728: 3727: 3726: 3725: 3701: 3700: 3680: 3679: 3678: 3677: 3676: 3675: 3674: 3673: 3645: 3644: 3643: 3642: 3622: 3621: 3590: 3589: 3542: 3539: 3507: 3504: 3487: 3484: 3467: 3464: 3441: 3438: 3421: 3418: 3393: 3390: 3389: 3388: 3368:here's another 3338: 3337: 3336: 3335: 3334: 3333: 3332: 3331: 3330: 3329: 3328: 3327: 3213: 3212: 3211: 3210: 3209: 3208: 3207: 3206: 3205: 3204: 3203: 3202: 3201: 3200: 3199: 3198: 3025: 3022: 2999: 2996: 2995: 2994: 2993: 2992: 2935: 2932: 2931: 2930: 2880: 2875: 2856: 2853: 2852: 2851: 2815: 2812: 2790: 2786: 2783: 2750: 2747: 2728: 2723: 2722: 2721: 2720: 2719: 2706: 2705: 2682:impersonal God 2677: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2671: 2670: 2669: 2668: 2667: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2622: 2621: 2620: 2619: 2618: 2617: 2616: 2615: 2595: 2594: 2593: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2566: 2565: 2564: 2563: 2547: 2546: 2527: 2526: 2525: 2506: 2503: 2488: 2485: 2473: 2470: 2467: 2466: 2463: 2451:primary source 2444: 2435:WP:NOT#PUBLISH 2431: 2428: 2420: 2417: 2402: 2399: 2381: 2378: 2377: 2376: 2354: 2351: 2339: 2336: 2334: 2305: 2302: 2301: 2284: 2273: 2272: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2249: 2248: 2247: 2200: 2197: 2196: 2195: 2176: 2173: 2158: 2155: 2120: 2117: 2095: 2092: 2073: 2070: 2046: 2043: 2031: 2028: 2009: 2008:Rating the ToK 2006: 1995: 1992: 1988: 1987: 1978: 1967: 1954: 1944: 1942: 1939: 1929: 1927: 1926: 1915: 1913: 1912: 1907: 1906: 1900: 1887: 1884: 1838: 1837: 1791: 1790: 1750: 1745: 1725: 1722: 1719: 1718: 1704: 1703: 1698: 1696: 1685: 1682: 1670: 1667: 1661: 1658: 1627: 1624: 1612: 1609: 1595: 1592: 1580: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1542:Francescopedia 1532: 1529: 1510: 1509: 1508: 1507: 1495: 1494: 1464: 1461: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1453: 1430: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1396: 1395: 1371: 1370: 1344: 1341: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1303: 1298: 1293: 1288: 1285: 1280: 1275: 1270: 1267: 1262: 1257: 1252: 1249: 1244: 1239: 1234: 1231: 1229:Gregory Currie 1226: 1221: 1216: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1204: 1199: 1194: 1189: 1184: 1179: 1174: 1169: 1164: 1159: 1154: 1149: 1144: 1139: 1134: 1129: 1124: 1119: 1114: 1112: 1097: 1094: 1093: 1092: 1091: 1090: 1080: 1072: 1064: 1047: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1038: 998: 995: 976: 975: 960: 959: 958: 957: 950: 941: 930: 921: 903: 892: 880: 879: 847: 840: 839: 838: 837: 836: 835: 834: 833: 832: 784: 781: 780: 779: 755: 754: 753: 752: 736: 735: 734: 733: 715: 714: 713: 712: 697: 696: 659: 656: 655: 654: 653: 652: 639: 638: 627: 626: 608: 600: 599: 592: 591: 534: 533: 515: 512: 497: 494: 473: 470: 468: 461: 440:issue in the 433: 430: 428: 412: 409: 408: 407: 392: 391: 382: 381: 338: 335: 323: 320: 318: 292: 289: 248: 245: 244: 243: 242: 241: 230: 229: 222: 221: 202: 201: 200: 199: 192: 191: 180: 179: 174: 173: 140: 137: 123: 122: 121:the good work! 106: 103: 85:User:Edhubbard 81:about yourself 72: 69: 48: 45: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4841: 4832: 4831: 4828: 4822: 4818: 4814: 4810: 4806: 4795: 4793: 4789: 4778: 4776: 4770: 4769: 4767: 4760: 4758: 4754: 4740: 4736: 4733: 4731: 4730: 4726: 4722: 4718: 4717: 4712: 4708: 4700: 4693: 4691: 4690: 4686: 4682: 4679:. Thank you. 4678: 4674: 4670: 4666: 4662: 4656: 4654: 4650: 4646: 4639: 4632: 4627: 4625: 4624: 4612: 4605: 4601: 4600: 4596: 4593: 4589: 4585: 4581: 4580: 4579: 4576: 4574: 4573: 4557: 4555: 4554: 4550: 4546: 4542: 4538: 4534: 4530: 4522: 4515: 4513: 4512: 4508: 4504: 4500: 4496: 4492: 4488: 4484: 4480: 4476: 4472: 4463: 4460: 4458: 4457: 4453: 4449: 4445: 4441: 4433: 4431: 4430: 4426: 4422: 4418: 4414: 4410: 4406: 4398: 4396: 4395: 4391: 4387: 4378: 4376: 4375: 4371: 4367: 4363: 4359: 4355: 4351: 4343: 4337: 4334: 4331: 4330: 4323: 4322: 4319: 4316: 4313: 4308: 4302: 4300: 4299: 4295: 4291: 4287: 4281: 4280: 4276: 4272: 4267: 4263: 4259: 4256: 4249: 4245: 4241: 4237: 4233: 4229: 4225: 4220: 4219: 4218: 4217: 4213: 4209: 4205: 4201: 4194:Cytowic image 4193: 4189: 4185: 4181: 4177: 4173: 4172: 4171: 4169: 4165: 4161: 4158:. Thank you.( 4157: 4153: 4149: 4145: 4141: 4137: 4132: 4130: 4126: 4122: 4119:. Thank you.( 4118: 4114: 4110: 4106: 4102: 4097: 4093: 4089: 4085: 4080: 4072: 4068: 4064: 4060: 4056: 4055: 4054: 4051: 4047: 4043: 4039: 4035: 4023: 4021: 4018: 4017: 4013: 4009: 4005: 3997: 3995: 3993: 3989: 3985: 3984:67.60.203.231 3981: 3974: 3972: 3968: 3964: 3959: 3957: 3953: 3949: 3945: 3941: 3937: 3936:do not attack 3932: 3927: 3926: 3922: 3918: 3914: 3910: 3902: 3900: 3899: 3896: 3891: 3887: 3880: 3878: 3877: 3873: 3869: 3865: 3858: 3854: 3852: 3851: 3847: 3843: 3834: 3830: 3826: 3822: 3817: 3816: 3815: 3814: 3810: 3806: 3798: 3796: 3795: 3791: 3787: 3779: 3775: 3771: 3767: 3763: 3758: 3757: 3756: 3755: 3751: 3747: 3741: 3737: 3724: 3720: 3714: 3709: 3705: 3704: 3703: 3702: 3699: 3695: 3690: 3686: 3682: 3681: 3672: 3668: 3663: 3662: 3661: 3657: 3651: 3650: 3649: 3648: 3647: 3646: 3641: 3637: 3633: 3629: 3626: 3625: 3624: 3623: 3620: 3616: 3611: 3607: 3606: 3605: 3604: 3600: 3596: 3595:Jan.Kamenicek 3588: 3584: 3580: 3579:Jan.Kamenicek 3575: 3574: 3573: 3572: 3568: 3564: 3563:Jan.Kamenicek 3561:. Thank you. 3560: 3556: 3552: 3548: 3540: 3538: 3537: 3533: 3529: 3524: 3519: 3514: 3505: 3503: 3502: 3498: 3494: 3485: 3483: 3481: 3477: 3473: 3465: 3463: 3461: 3457: 3453: 3452:64.222.201.18 3449: 3439: 3437: 3436: 3432: 3428: 3419: 3417: 3414: 3412: 3407: 3403: 3399: 3391: 3387: 3384: 3379: 3373: 3369: 3365: 3364: 3363: 3362: 3359: 3354: 3347: 3343: 3326: 3323: 3318: 3312: 3311: 3310: 3306: 3302: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3293: 3288: 3282: 3281: 3280: 3276: 3272: 3268: 3267: 3266: 3262: 3258: 3254: 3253: 3252: 3249: 3244: 3237: 3233: 3232: 3231: 3230: 3226: 3222: 3218: 3197: 3194: 3189: 3182: 3181: 3180: 3176: 3172: 3168: 3167: 3166: 3163: 3158: 3152: 3148: 3144: 3143: 3142: 3138: 3134: 3130: 3126: 3125: 3124: 3121: 3116: 3110: 3109:Felipe Garcia 3106: 3105: 3104: 3100: 3096: 3092: 3091:Felipe Garcia 3087: 3086: 3085: 3082: 3077: 3070: 3069: 3068: 3064: 3060: 3056: 3055: 3054: 3053: 3049: 3045: 3044: 3039: 3035: 3031: 3023: 3021: 3020: 3017: 3012: 3006: 2997: 2991: 2987: 2983: 2979: 2974: 2973: 2972: 2968: 2966: 2959: 2958: 2957: 2956: 2952: 2948: 2945: 2941: 2933: 2929: 2925: 2919: 2913: 2912: 2911: 2910: 2906: 2900: 2894: 2890: 2886: 2879: 2876: 2874: 2873: 2869: 2865: 2861: 2854: 2850: 2846: 2842: 2838: 2837: 2836: 2835: 2831: 2827: 2822: 2813: 2811: 2809: 2806:was added at 2805: 2799: 2795: 2784: 2782: 2781: 2777: 2773: 2771: 2764: 2760: 2756: 2746: 2745: 2742: 2738: 2734: 2733:User:Bishonen 2727: 2724: 2718: 2715: 2710: 2709: 2708: 2707: 2704: 2701: 2697: 2693: 2692: 2691: 2690: 2687: 2683: 2675: 2661: 2658: 2654: 2651: 2650: 2649: 2646: 2645: 2640: 2639: 2638: 2632: 2631: 2630: 2629: 2628: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2614: 2611: 2607: 2603: 2602: 2601: 2600: 2599: 2598: 2597: 2596: 2589: 2586: 2585: 2580: 2579: 2578: 2572: 2571: 2570: 2569: 2568: 2567: 2562: 2559: 2555: 2551: 2550: 2549: 2548: 2545: 2542: 2541: 2536: 2535: 2534: 2528: 2524: 2521: 2520: 2518: 2517: 2516: 2515: 2512: 2504: 2502: 2501: 2498: 2494: 2487:Dennett quote 2486: 2484: 2483: 2480: 2471: 2462:information. 2461: 2456: 2452: 2448: 2445: 2441: 2438: 2436: 2429: 2427: 2425: 2416: 2415: 2412: 2408: 2400: 2398: 2397: 2394: 2389: 2385: 2379: 2375: 2372: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2361: 2352: 2350: 2349: 2346: 2337: 2335: 2332: 2331: 2328: 2327: 2320: 2316: 2310: 2303: 2300: 2299: 2296: 2289: 2283: 2282: 2279: 2271: 2268: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2257: 2246: 2243: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2233: 2229: 2228: 2227: 2224: 2220: 2219: 2218: 2217: 2214: 2210: 2205: 2198: 2194: 2190: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2184: 2180: 2174: 2172: 2171: 2168: 2164: 2156: 2154: 2153: 2150: 2144: 2140: 2136: 2132: 2127: 2124: 2118: 2116: 2113: 2108: 2107: 2101: 2093: 2091: 2088: 2083: 2082: 2071: 2069: 2068: 2065: 2061: 2060: 2054: 2053: 2044: 2042: 2041: 2038: 2029: 2027: 2026: 2023: 2019: 2015: 2007: 2005: 2004: 2001: 1993: 1986: 1983: 1977:'s talk page. 1976: 1972: 1966: 1964: 1960: 1952: 1947: 1940: 1938: 1937: 1934: 1925: 1922: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1909: 1908: 1903: 1902: 1901: 1898: 1897: 1894: 1885: 1883: 1880: 1876: 1872: 1868: 1861: 1858: 1854: 1851: 1848: 1844: 1841: 1835: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1829: 1824: 1823: 1818: 1815: 1811: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1800: 1795: 1789: 1785: 1781: 1774: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1767: 1763: 1756: 1749: 1746: 1744: 1743: 1740: 1736: 1732: 1723: 1717: 1714: 1710: 1706: 1705: 1702: 1699: 1694: 1689: 1683: 1681: 1677: 1676:- H.R. Eaton 1674: 1668: 1666: 1659: 1657: 1656: 1653: 1647: 1646: 1643: 1638: 1637: 1634: 1625: 1623: 1622: 1619: 1610: 1608: 1607: 1604: 1600: 1591: 1590: 1587: 1578: 1572: 1569: 1565: 1562: 1561: 1560: 1557: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1550: 1547: 1543: 1539: 1530: 1528: 1527: 1524: 1520: 1516: 1506: 1503: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1493: 1490: 1486: 1481: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1475: 1471: 1462: 1452: 1449: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1440: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1426: 1423: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1411: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1394: 1391: 1387: 1384: 1380: 1376: 1373: 1372: 1369: 1366: 1361: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1354: 1351: 1342: 1340: 1339: 1336: 1332: 1327: 1325: 1321: 1317: 1312: 1302: 1299: 1297: 1294: 1292: 1289: 1286: 1284: 1281: 1279: 1276: 1274: 1271: 1268: 1266: 1263: 1261: 1258: 1256: 1253: 1250: 1248: 1245: 1243: 1240: 1238: 1235: 1232: 1230: 1227: 1225: 1222: 1220: 1217: 1214: 1213: 1208: 1207:Norbaeocystin 1205: 1203: 1200: 1198: 1195: 1193: 1190: 1188: 1185: 1183: 1180: 1178: 1175: 1173: 1170: 1168: 1165: 1163: 1160: 1158: 1155: 1153: 1150: 1148: 1145: 1143: 1140: 1138: 1135: 1133: 1130: 1128: 1125: 1123: 1120: 1118: 1115: 1113: 1110: 1109: 1107: 1104: 1102: 1095: 1089: 1086: 1081: 1078: 1073: 1070: 1065: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1054: 1045: 1037: 1034: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1025: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1015: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1004: 996: 994: 993: 990: 986: 982: 974: 971: 967: 962: 961: 956: 954: 951: 949: 947: 942: 939: 935: 931: 929: 927: 922: 919: 915: 911: 907: 906: 904: 901: 897: 893: 890: 886: 882: 881: 877: 876: 875: 874: 871: 868: 864: 863: 860: 856: 853: 845: 841: 831: 828: 824: 823: 822: 819: 818: 817: 814: 809: 808: 807: 804: 803: 802: 801: 798: 794: 790: 782: 778: 775: 771: 766: 765: 764: 763: 760: 751: 748: 744: 740: 739: 738: 737: 731: 727: 723: 719: 718: 717: 716: 709: 705: 701: 700: 699: 698: 695: 692: 688: 684: 683: 682: 681: 678: 674: 670: 666: 657: 651: 648: 647:Keenan Pepper 643: 642: 641: 640: 637: 634: 629: 628: 623: 619: 618: 617: 607: 606: 597: 594: 593: 589: 586: 583: 580:entry. This 579: 575: 571: 567: 563: 559: 555: 551: 547: 543: 540: 536: 535: 531: 530: 529: 528: 525: 524:Keenan Pepper 521: 511: 510: 507: 503: 495: 493: 492: 489: 485: 479: 478: 471: 469: 466: 465: 459: 458: 455: 451: 447: 443: 439: 431: 429: 426: 425: 422: 417: 410: 406: 403: 398: 394: 393: 389: 384: 383: 378: 377: 376: 375: 372: 367: 364: 360: 356: 351: 347: 345: 336: 334: 333: 330: 321: 319: 316: 315: 312: 309: 305: 300: 296: 290: 288: 287: 284: 281: 276: 272: 269: 265: 261: 256: 252: 246: 240: 237: 231: 227: 224:I also tried 223: 219: 215: 214: 213: 212: 211: 210: 207: 196: 195: 194: 193: 190: 187: 182: 181: 176: 175: 170: 169: 168: 167: 164: 159: 156: 152: 148: 145: 138: 136: 135: 132: 128: 119: 118: 117: 116: 113: 104: 102: 101: 98: 94: 90: 86: 82: 78: 70: 68: 67: 63: 59: 53: 46: 44: 43: 40: 35: 34: 31: 26: 23: 20: 17: 4807:, but other 4796: 4788:edit summary 4779: 4772: 4763: 4762: 4750: 4715: 4704: 4664: 4657: 4647:, and add a 4628: 4622: 4619: 4611:OTRS pending 4598: 4591: 4577: 4570: 4568: 4526: 4466: 4437: 4402: 4382: 4347: 4326: 4317: 4282: 4268: 4264: 4260: 4257: 4253: 4197: 4133: 4092:edit summary 4076: 4027: 4019: 4001: 3975: 3960: 3939: 3928: 3906: 3892: 3888: 3884: 3881:Wiki editing 3862: 3857:Apperception 3838: 3802: 3784:No worries. 3783: 3742: 3738: 3734: 3712: 3707: 3591: 3544: 3525: 3512: 3509: 3489: 3469: 3443: 3423: 3415: 3408: 3404: 3395: 3339: 3214: 3041: 3027: 3001: 2937: 2882: 2858: 2817: 2814:Ramachandran 2788: 2769: 2752: 2730: 2681: 2679: 2643: 2636: 2634: 2583: 2576: 2574: 2539: 2532: 2530: 2508: 2490: 2475: 2472:Back from US 2447:News Reports 2446: 2433: 2422: 2404: 2390: 2386: 2383: 2356: 2341: 2333: 2322: 2311: 2307: 2285: 2274: 2253: 2206: 2202: 2181: 2178: 2160: 2125: 2122: 2105: 2097: 2080: 2075: 2057: 2050: 2049:The article 2048: 2033: 2011: 1997: 1968: 1957:The article 1956: 1928: 1914: 1899: 1889: 1871:63.135.9.214 1862: 1859: 1855: 1852: 1849: 1845: 1842: 1839: 1825: 1819: 1816: 1812: 1808: 1803: 1802: 1798: 1796: 1792: 1752: 1727: 1708: 1700: 1678: 1675: 1672: 1663: 1648: 1639: 1629: 1614: 1597: 1582: 1541: 1537: 1534: 1514: 1511: 1466: 1406: 1359: 1346: 1328: 1315: 1314:If you have 1313: 1309: 1117:Recollection 1099: 1077:tin-foil hat 1068: 1049: 1000: 977: 952: 943: 923: 917: 866: 865: 849: 820: 805: 786: 756: 661: 621: 615: 604: 602: 581: 538: 518:Please read 517: 499: 483: 480: 476: 475: 467: 460: 435: 427: 418: 414: 397:synaesthesia 368: 359:phantom limb 355:Synaesthesia 352: 348: 344:Oliver Sacks 340: 325: 317: 301: 297: 294: 277: 273: 268:neuroscience 257: 253: 250: 236:Bungalowbill 225: 217: 203: 160: 157: 153: 149: 146: 142: 126: 124: 108: 74: 54: 50: 36: 27: 24: 21: 18: 15: 4448:Brews ohare 4421:Dana boomer 4366:Dana boomer 4290:Andy Fugard 4271:Andy Fugard 4200:this thread 4156:core policy 4032:—Preceding 3978:—Preceding 3913:WP:USERTALK 3446:—Preceding 3392:Ed, old boy 3372:these edits 2802:—Preceding 2407:UC Berkeley 1735:Synesthesia 1731:Burning Man 1385:talk page 1301:Fritz Perls 1251:Add Sources 1197:Enucleation 1167:Cholestasis 852:synesthesia 844:synesthesia 730:an IP check 578:number form 546:synesthesia 502:my talkpage 206:Sean A. Day 163:Sean A. Day 105:Synesthesia 30:Sean A. Day 4716:discussion 4487:topic bans 4344:FAR notice 4059:Tesseract2 4038:Tesseract2 3907:Regarding 3691:. Cheers, 3608:Hello Ed. 3151:Kyle Busch 3147:Kyle Petty 2947:LoveMonkey 2893:concussion 2889:the review 2841:Robert K S 2826:Robert K S 2430:What rule? 2411:Jay Gatsby 2199:Wiktionary 2135:Lacatosias 2100:this image 1886:Brain/Mind 1660:Salz image 1519:Ingo Swann 1335:SuggestBot 1101:SuggestBot 708:Amputation 506:Lifeartist 363:mirror box 329:Lifeartist 260:Psychology 112:Shaggorama 4821:consensus 4755:has been 4751:The file 4649:rationale 4588:this list 4483:site bans 4440:Free will 4405:Free will 4328:Tesseract 4236:Edhubbard 4206:. Sorry. 4174:Huey45 - 4109:consensus 3868:Abecedare 3821:IdLoveOne 3805:IdLoveOne 3610:Nice work 3506:Hello!! = 3301:Edhubbard 3271:Edhubbard 3257:Edhubbard 3221:Edhubbard 3171:Edhubbard 3133:Edhubbard 3095:Edhubbard 3059:Edhubbard 2982:Edhubbard 2934:Free will 2855:Stressed? 2700:Edhubbard 2657:Edhubbard 2610:Edhubbard 2558:Edhubbard 2393:Dylan2106 2338:Job Offer 2175:Attention 2064:Psykhosis 1799:questions 1566:it is. -- 1556:Edhubbard 1536:articles 1489:Edhubbard 1390:Edhubbard 1379:Free will 1365:Edhubbard 1324:ForteTuba 1255:Psilocybe 1137:Deliriant 1085:Edhubbard 870:Edhubbard 859:Edhubbard 633:Edhubbard 450:talk page 446:Free will 186:Edhubbard 131:Edhubbard 127:something 39:Edhubbard 4584:CC-BY-SA 4073:May 2010 4046:contribs 4034:unsigned 3980:unsigned 3842:Auntie E 3780:Response 3708:has been 3448:unsigned 3366:And now 2944:3R rule. 2864:Hyacinth 2741:DreamGuy 2676:Einstein 2505:blocking 2460:verified 2455:Wikinews 2319:Grutness 2143:contribs 2131:unsigned 2037:Garrondo 1867:unsigned 1739:Phidauex 1611:Freewill 1360:research 1316:feedback 1202:Lysergol 981:Epilepsy 846:article? 827:Beno1000 825:Thanks! 813:Beno1000 797:Beno1000 454:fnielsen 438:Tourette 402:Phidauex 371:Phidauex 308:Mattisse 280:Mattisse 75:Hello! 4826:Minorax 4721:Stefan2 4681:Stefan2 4545:Stefan2 4176:WP:DTTR 4140:Welcome 3963:BASHAMA 3948:BASHAMA 3944:blocked 3934:Please 3236:Pokemon 2964:Kerotan 2917:delldot 2898:delldot 2821:WP:LEAD 2804:comment 2794:stampit 2606:WP:bite 2292:Noetica 1975:article 1963:cleanup 1779:Georgia 1761:Georgia 1626:Dawkins 1265:Imagery 1215:Cleanup 1069:attempt 444:of the 4790:or on 4473:. The 4407:for a 4352:for a 4333:(talk) 4284:Maybe 4224:WP:BIO 4180:Scarpy 4160:Huey45 4121:Huey45 4008:Penbat 3917:DMacks 3549:for a 3520:": --> 3472:JotDee 3400:": --> 3043:C.Fred 3038:WP:AIV 3034:WP:SSP 2772:enough 2766:feel. 2759:memory 2686:RS2007 2637:Fyslee 2577:Fyslee 2533:Fyslee 2511:Foxsux 2401:colors 1755:WP:FAR 1652:NBeale 1642:NBeale 1633:NBeale 1618:NBeale 1515:Nature 1287:Expand 1269:Wikify 1182:Savant 1147:2C-T-2 997:Thanks 946:WP:MOS 934:WP:NOT 926:WP:GTL 669:WP:AN3 665:WP:ANI 658:"Stub" 582:useful 472:Thanks 311:(talk) 283:(talk) 266:, and 151:done. 97:Merope 4232:WP:AN 4204:WP:AN 3799:Sorry 3744:well. 3382:talk 3357:talk 3321:talk 3291:talk 3247:talk 3217:Sandy 3192:talk 3161:talk 3119:talk 3080:talk 3015:talk 2288:Color 2278:Torgo 2267:Torgo 2256:Torgo 2242:Torgo 2232:Torgo 2223:Torgo 2213:Torgo 2157:Crank 2106:BRIAN 2081:BRIAN 1777:Sandy 1759:Sandy 1713:Solar 1586:Solar 1523:Solar 1502:Solar 1474:Solar 1448:Sandy 1439:Sandy 1422:Sandy 1343:Crank 1237:K-PAX 1233:Merge 1111:Stubs 1033:Sandy 1024:Sandy 1014:Sandy 1003:Sandy 989:Sandy 970:Sandy 966:WP:PR 938:WP:EL 774:Sandy 759:Sandy 691:Sandy 677:Sandy 622:loved 327:back. 4725:talk 4685:talk 4604:here 4594:; or 4549:talk 4507:talk 4452:talk 4425:talk 4417:here 4390:talk 4370:talk 4362:here 4294:talk 4275:talk 4240:talk 4212:talk 4184:talk 4164:talk 4125:talk 4063:talk 4042:talk 4012:talk 3988:talk 3967:talk 3952:talk 3940:will 3921:talk 3872:talk 3855:Re: 3846:talk 3825:talk 3809:talk 3790:talk 3770:talk 3750:talk 3689:this 3685:here 3628:Snap 3599:talk 3583:talk 3567:talk 3559:here 3532:talk 3497:talk 3476:talk 3456:talk 3431:talk 3420:Hey! 3344:and 3305:talk 3275:talk 3261:talk 3225:talk 3175:talk 3137:talk 3129:here 3099:talk 3063:talk 3048:talk 2986:talk 2951:talk 2940:this 2923:talk 2904:talk 2868:talk 2845:talk 2830:talk 2798:talk 2776:talk 2763:here 2644:talk 2584:talk 2540:talk 2325:wha? 2295:Talk 2139:talk 2111:0918 2086:0918 1875:talk 1784:Talk 1766:Talk 1599:This 1564:Here 1544:. -- 936:and 912:and 741:The 667:(or 616:. 564:and 539:have 361:and 304:WP:V 91:and 62:talk 4737:of 4626:. 4467:Hi, 4399:FAR 4202:at 3942:be 3864:FYI 2891:of 2770:far 2768:dig 2757:to 2437:: 2321:... 2317:). 2193:WLU 2183:WLU 2022:EPM 1757:? 1291:ZFS 772:. 743:3RR 704:IRC 4794:. 4777:. 4727:) 4687:) 4663:. 4641:}} 4635:{{ 4614:}} 4608:{{ 4590:) 4551:) 4509:) 4485:, 4454:) 4446:. 4427:) 4419:. 4392:) 4372:) 4364:. 4296:) 4277:) 4269:-- 4242:) 4214:) 4186:) 4170:) 4166:) 4131:) 4127:) 4065:) 4048:) 4044:• 4014:) 4006:-- 3990:) 3973:) 3969:) 3958:) 3954:) 3923:) 3874:) 3848:) 3827:) 3819:-- 3811:) 3792:) 3772:) 3752:) 3632::) 3630:! 3601:) 3585:) 3569:) 3534:) 3526:-- 3513:I 3499:) 3482:) 3478:) 3458:) 3433:) 3409:-- 3374:. 3307:) 3277:) 3263:) 3227:) 3177:) 3139:) 3101:) 3065:) 3050:) 2988:) 2980:. 2953:) 2870:) 2862:? 2847:) 2832:) 2778:) 2465:” 2443:“ 2426:. 2147:-- 2141:• 2035:-- 1877:) 1786:) 1768:) 1408:-- 795:. 609:— 572:, 560:, 556:, 552:, 262:, 204:-- 161:-- 64:) 28:-- 4768:. 4723:( 4683:( 4547:( 4505:( 4450:( 4423:( 4388:( 4368:( 4292:( 4273:( 4238:( 4210:( 4182:( 4162:( 4123:( 4061:( 4040:( 4010:( 3986:( 3965:( 3950:( 3919:( 3870:( 3859:. 3844:( 3823:( 3807:( 3788:( 3768:( 3748:( 3713:F 3597:( 3581:( 3565:( 3530:( 3495:( 3474:( 3454:( 3429:( 3303:( 3273:( 3259:( 3223:( 3173:( 3135:( 3097:( 3061:( 3046:( 2984:( 2949:( 2866:( 2843:( 2828:( 2796:( 2774:( 2641:/ 2581:/ 2537:/ 2137:( 1965:. 1881:. 1873:( 1782:( 1764:( 1538:I 645:— 590:. 484:I 60:(

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index