Login
Login

User talk:TWYLIVE

Welcome!

File:Wikipedia-logo.svg

Hello, TWYLIVE!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

{{center|Introduction to contributing}}

{{columns-list|colwidth=15em|

}}

----

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

----

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

  • Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
  • It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
  • If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Sign your messages with four tildes (~~~~), be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
  • When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
  • If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
  • Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 22:36, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation|Articles for creation]]: [[Draft:Age regression in psychology|Age regression in psychology]] (May 22)

File:AFC-Logo_Decline.svgYour recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by The Most Comfortable Chair was:

{{divbox|gray|3=Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at :Regression (psychology) instead.|}} Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

{{clear}}

  • If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Age regression in psychology and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
  • If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Age regression in psychology, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{tl|Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
  • If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
  • If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit§ion=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Age_regression_in_psychology Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_Most_Comfortable_Chair&action=edit§ion=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Age_regression_in_psychology reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— The Most Comfortable Chair 14:09, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

style="margin: 0.4em 2em;"
style="vertical-align: top;"

| alt=Teahouse logo

|

Hello, TWYLIVE!

Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! — The Most Comfortable Chair 14:09, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation through AfC

Yes. We <em>are</em> biased.

Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia, once wrote:{{Cite web |title=Wikipedia founder responds to pro-alt-med petition; skeptics cheer |url=https://skeptools.wordpress.com/2014/03/25/wikipedia-jimmy-wales-responds-change-org-alt-med-alternative-medicine-cam/ |last=Farley |first=Tim |date=25 March 2014 |work=Skeptical Software Tools |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211019121426/https://skeptools.wordpress.com/2014/03/25/wikipedia-jimmy-wales-responds-change-org-alt-med-alternative-medicine-cam/ |archive-date=19 October 2021 |url-status=live |access-date=4 November 2021}}{{Cite web |title=Jimmy Wales Gets Real, and Sassy, About Wikipedia's Holistic Healing Coverage |url=https://slate.com/technology/2014/03/jimmy-wales-denies-petition-from-advocates-of-holistic-healing-about-wikipedia-s-coverage.html |last=Hay Newman |first=Lily |date=27 March 2014 |work=Slate |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140328000015/http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/03/27/jimmy_wales_denies_petition_from_advocates_of_holistic_healing_about_wikipedia.html |archive-date=28 March 2014 |url-status=live |access-date=4 November 2021}}{{Cite web |title=An excellent response to complaints about medical topics on Wikipedia |url=https://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/03/25/an-excellent-response-to-complaints-about-medical-topics-on-wikipedia |last=Gorski |first=David |author-link=David Gorski |date=24 March 2014 |work=ScienceBlogs |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211019210902/https://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/03/25/an-excellent-response-to-complaints-about-medical-topics-on-wikipedia |archive-date=19 October 2021 |url-status=live |access-date=4 November 2021}}{{Cite web |title=Standards of Evidence – Wikipedia Edition |url=https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/standards-of-evidence-wikipedia-edition/ |last=Novella |first=Steven |author-link=Steven Novella |date=25 March 2014 |work=NeuroLogica Blog |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211020005024/https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/standards-of-evidence-wikipedia-edition/ |archive-date=20 October 2021 |url-status=live |access-date=4 November 2021}}

Wikipedia's policies ... are exactly spot-on and correct. If you can get your work published in respectable scientific journals – that is to say, if you can produce evidence through replicable scientific experiments, then Wikipedia will cover it appropriately.

What we won't do is pretend that the work of lunatic charlatans is the equivalent of "true scientific discourse". It isn't.

So yes, we are biased.

And we are not going to change. tgeorgescu (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

:Is this where you get off? I can imagine people have done speedruns to see how fast they could get you to leave that god-awful copypasta on their talk page

:Anyway, i know how powerless and ridiculous you would like us anthroposophists to look, but reacting like this in under 2 minutes is not a good look for you either. Think about it. Actually think about it instead of writing a pseudointellectual slightly condescending reply and actually dwell on the thought that you removing claims that an article is not neutral within 1 minute is not very good for wikipedia, for the writer, and for you! My point was simple, saying that anthroposophy is based on white supremacist pseudoscience is an opinion and it should be made clear that other people do not share that opinion, or, making the article neutral is a good thing to do.

:But like actually think about that. If you are saying that your opinion is correct and triumphs over my opinion, even if that is the opinion of wikipedia as a whole, then that means that the notion of "Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view" is then completely false and some of the core bits of wikipedia mean nothing.

:I want you to consider the fact that saying your opinion is truer than mine means one of two things, either your opinion is fact and therefore not an opinion, OR, you misunderstand your opinion as fact and act accordingly.

:I will not be reading whatever you reply to this with, as i will be spending my time writing blog posts, social media posts, on the street, networking, and generally bringing awareness in a meaningful way to something that you wish could be suppressed forever.

:Anyways, i hope that inspired some thoughts within you, and i hope i never read anything you write again. TWYLIVE (talk) 23:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

Discretionary sanctions

{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{tlx|Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. tgeorgescu (talk) 22:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

}}

{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in pseudoscience and fringe science. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{tlx|Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. tgeorgescu (talk) 22:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

}}

Concern regarding [[Draft:Age regression in psychology]]

File:Information.svg Hello, TWYLIVE. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Age regression in psychology, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:02, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, [[Draft:Age regression in psychology]]

File:Information icon4.svg

Hello, TWYLIVE. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Age regression in psychology".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/G13?withJS=MediaWiki:G13-restore-wizard.js&page=Draft%3AAge+regression+in+psychology request its undeletion]. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 02:53, 5 January 2023 (UTC)