User talk:WLU

Anyone want to discuss my edits? Do so on my discussion page. I'll justify why I do what I do.

WLU 18:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Wiley Protocol

Here is an MD who not only describes the WP in his own words, but describes Wiley's thesis behind it. I suggest you add some of this material to the page and include it as a reference. http://www.centertm.com/default.asp?contentID=103 . This is a doctor who actually uses the protocol in his practice. There are quite a few now, but I'm only showing yuo websites that are authentic. Since I cannot add it and you are the only editor, your continuing refusal to acknowledge it is tantamount to censorship. Neil Raden 03:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nraden (talk • contribs) Also, I sign in and use the 4 tildes, which inserts my signature, but I always get the sinebot message too. I have checked the documentation but cannot find a reason. Can you you help please? Neil Raden 15:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nraden (talk • contribs)

The problem with SineBot is probably due to the lack of a link to your user page. Note above that all of my and Debv's signatures contain a wikilink to our user pages, thus, WLU, which looks like this in raw format [[User:WLU|WLU]]. I would guess that SineBot is adding the unsigned template because your signature lacks said link to a user page. If you go to 'my preferences' at the top of the page, and unclick the Raw signature box, I'm guessing SineBot will stop following you around. Alternately, you could tweak the text contained therein to include a link to your user page. Right now I'm guessing it just says Nraden when it should say [[User:Nraden|Nraden]], [[User:Nraden|Wiley fan]] or anything else after the piped link.

As for the weblink, I would never use that citation - there is no references used on the page, and the doctor 'gushes' far too much for my taste. It doesn't help that he's also pushing a bunch of other hormonal 'miracle' 'cures' like GH therapy and HOMEOPATHY, the single least-proven 'treatment' extant in the medical world. This highlights an overall problem with the Wiley Protocol - everything makes great sense when presented as a 'just so' story, but there's no testing or citations to back it up. The problem with the Wiley Protocol is that it is being promoted in popular literature outside of the scientific mainstream without any peer-reviewed testing or proof that I can find, bypassing the usual channels to produce reliable information consistent with the wikipedia policy. If Wiley were to actually do some double-blinded, peer-reviewed studies to test the protocol, then report them in a journal, there would be no problem. 'Innovative' theories 'ignored' by the scientific establishment are generally codewords for 'unproven and untested' and are often used to promote quackery. Scientific testing distinguishes between quackery and novel, useful therapeutic modalities. If the WP actually works, testing will inevitably show it, so be patient.

About the only thing I would be willing to say using that page would be to say that the WP is dosed to respond to lunar cycles. I can't even tease out what the doctor is saying versus what the actual WP says. If you really think the information should be in the page, take it to a WP:RFC, asking if the link is appropriate. If the RFC says it is OK, I'll put it up on the page. Though you have taken some steps recently to appropriately engage the community by speaking to admins, doing a good job of editing wikipedia to be in line with protocol and policies takes a significant investment of time. You can't just throw stuff up and expect people to do something with it. We're busy editors, and your approach doesn't exactly rub most of us (or at least me) the right way. Further:

There are quite a few now, but I'm only showing yuo websites that are authentic.

How do you measure authenticity? Is it based on comparison to the books? Having never read the books, I don't know if they're accurate or not, and you are not a reliable source, so I'm reluctant to take your word for it. Actually, you are less than a reliable source since you are Wiley's husband, and have a vested interest in the protocol selling well. If you had book reviews in reliable publications (even Time, CNN or newspapers), that would be a suitable source of information. Wikipedia publishes verifiability, not truth - we write what we can cite.

Since I cannot add it and you are the only editor, your continuing refusal to acknowledge it is tantamount to censorship

That's laughable, insulting, and is in no way increasing my interest in modifying the WP page in accordance with your interests. Were I to add said link to the page, I'd be opening the page up for equally unreliable sources to be added, such as information from wileywatch. And I don't think you would like that. Did you know you can do a RFC on users? If you'd really like, you can put in a RFC on my actions on the WP page, and see what they say. If my actions are supported, perhaps you'd consider not insulting me with jibes like 'censorship', bias and 'conflict of interest'. Your continual insistence on demanding what you would like to see done to the page, without bothering to refer to policy, are increasing my bias against you, though they aren't really changing how I feel about the page itself.

WLU 14:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip about the sig, let's see if that solves it. The rest of your comments I find strange. OK, homeopathy, no clinical trials, I can see where you're coming from. So why not just say that? Here is what it is, it isn't proven. Instead, we load the page with negatives. There are thousands of women who feel differently about that, an observational trial started at a university and two MAJOR research universities vying for federal funds to study it big time. No other BHRT can say that. So go ahead, say it's unproven in clinical study, but at least allow it to be described adequately. Can't you find a way to do that without endorsing it? There is an adequate description in the Senate testimony. I'd be happy to give you a paragraph or two to work with if you'd rather do that. And BTW, I'm more interested in my wife's name not being defamed than I am in the commercial value of the protocol. And she is more interested in women's health than the commercial value. Neil Raden 22:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Would you mind looking at Neil Raden's two latest comments on the Wiley Protocol talk page (dated Oct. 5)? By my reading of WP:NPA, these are both personal attacks on the grounds of "Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done." I would like to know what you think as you're more familiar with the policy and its application than I.

I have so far bridled my responses expecting that this sort of thing is not going to be tolerated by other editors. It appears that Wikidudeman is not currently interested in mediating the disputes on these pages -- perhaps his hands are full elsewhere -- leaving something of a vacuum.

Thank you. Debv 02:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't see personal attacks so significant it could result in a block. Further, I am not an admin, and neither is WDM. We're regular editors with no special powers. You could bring it up to an admin, the WP page is pretty touchy for everyone. I trust User:Isotope23 and User:FisherQueen and they're usually on-line fairly frequently, but there's not enough there for any real action. The problem with Wiley is that there is no documented evidence by reliable sources of anything positive or negative that is firm enough for definitive statements, so everyone fights over the scraps of theory and counter-theory. Keep cool and suggest direct changes backed up by reliable sources. Raden's comments, if not backed by reliable sources, are never going up on the page. He can insult and challenge credibility/motivation all he wants, but he can't edit the page. WLU 23:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

A section just for Wikidudeman and Hodgepodge

Because I know it's coming... I'll play with the current version a bit, then remind me in a week or so to try the upgrades. I reverted back to popups because wikipedia refuses to show me my watchlist, but I think it's unrelated and I'm going back to HP shortly. WLU 17:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Same problem here. Nothing to do with HP, It's fixed now. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 17:28, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Popups works for me so it should work for you, At least if you're using Firefox. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 17:47, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why I'm getting this problem when HP/Popups was working fine this morning. This is on IE, where it was both working this morning, and not working now. I'll see what happens tomorrow morning, perhaps restarting my computer will magically fix it. I'll let you know. WLU 17:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Try importing Hodgepodge and clearing your cache, etc. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 17:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, When I try HP on Internet explorer it doesn't work at all. The tabs don't show up, Nothing works. It's meant to be used only on firefox and that's it. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 17:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Internal Linking

Hi there WLU once again, thanks for your cooperation you've been really helpful.

Now I have been looking for some info related to internal linking (linking articles), I wonder if it is OK to link every word that has an article related to the main article, I mean lets take menopause as an example.

If I do get to find "hot flashes" 4 times in the article, should I link them all??, should be the first one, I don't know. And I'm not even sure if it has a particular criteria.

Thanks.

JenniferFisher 19:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Best bet is to read for yourself, here and here.

If it's a small example of another full page, put in a {{main}} and link to the first instance of the word in the subsequent paragraph. Links should occur at least once per page, and for longer pages, duplicate links may be used if it is particularly relevant to the section or if it has been several sections since an earlier link. Think of it as a reader - you'll want a link for the first use of the word, and if it's a new or confusing concept, you may want to look it up again if you need a reminder of what was being discussed. Don't link them all, but the rest is context. Anything I say that is contradicted by policy, go with policy. In general, a good thing to do is look for a policy or a manual of style guideline. Note that medical articles have their own MOS guidelines. WLU 20:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Pratchett sources

Thanks for the support, but I have no idea what User:Mystar's problem is, and I don't care enough to find out.--Per Abrahamsen 12:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately I barred from commenting on that particular user ('arbitration' in my archive) and you don't have e-mail hooked up. I can't actually figure out what the Terry Pratchett dispute is about. WLU 15:15, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

CreepyCrawler sockpuppet

Stop vandalising my page and my work, WLU.

This is your last warning. I will report you if you do it again. Stop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Voyager Bogg (talk • contribs) 10:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

New additions to talk pages should go at the bottom of pages, rather than the top. Please see WP:TALK for more details. WLU 10:37, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Please make a report at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 11:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! WLU 11:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Looks like Voyager Bogg has been indef blocked. The Rambling Man 11:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Should I still make the report at WP:SSP? I don't mind the learning experience, but I also don't want to waste my time if its unnecessary. WLU 12:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

List of Fantasy Worlds

Hi, reply is on my page. Please reply on my page. Thanks! Akiyama 15:43, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

New reply on my page. Will be offline for a while, so do what you think best. I was really doing this mostly for my personal use (ideally, I would like a complete list of fantasy worlds, in chronological order, with links - so when I discovered that there was already a list on Wikipedia, I thought "hey, someone has done half the work for me, it just needs improving . . ."); if I really hate what you do with it, I suppose the archived version will always be there for me to look at, or move elsewhere (I have my own wiki at Wikidot), or use as the basis for a new edit! Akiyama 17:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

It's funny there's no explicit mention of it on WP:NOT, but I'm pretty sure the spirit is that wikipedia is not here as a personal resource. But you are correct, it will always be here. You could always use a sub page to work on the RPG pages or links before adding them to mainspace. WLU 17:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Ha!

I knew you were CIA WLU, ever since I saw that black helicopter flying over my house, dropping magic pixie dust to brainwash me into going to work and being a good member of the hive mind society! You never suspected, but the metal fillings in my teeth started acting as a Radio transmitter, and I picked up the secret CIA channel, where George Bush (senior) came on the channel and said "10-4 WLU, end mission Isosceles Triangle and return to Area 51". Jello Biafra was right about you!--Isotope23 ^talk 19:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

.

.

.

Perhaps you're thinking of another WLU...or you should lay off the pixie dust :)

From the hive mind, WLU 21:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

I've been wondering, but would you consider adopting me? Andy pyro 20:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Sure! My other adoptees seem to have dropped off the face of the internet so I've got the time. I'm hoping it's the natural attrition of wikipedia rather than something about me.

My first recommendation to you is to install popups as it's a huge time saver. Also, it's a very, very good investment of time to at least skim some policies - WP:5P, WP:OR, WP:RS and WP:NOT are all very, very handy. There is a simplified ruleset that is handyish, but eventually you should read the full policies. Also, deletion debates are a great way to familiarize yourself with policy and are kinda fun!

There's a whole series of steps to complete the adoption process - I can either do it for you or you can do it yourself (which is possibly a better learning experience). Mostly I exist to answer questions and provide feedback - that's seemed to help my previous adoptees the most. If you're still interested, let me know. WLU 21:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I am still interested! Thank you for the recommendations! Oh, and I'm having trouble with popups. Do you have any recommendations for that? Thanks! Andy pyro 22:06, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Certainly, let me know what you'd like for a next step (including nothing at all)). Incidentally, the indentation level on talk pages is used to distinguish remarks from each other in time and user. Note that your comment I indented one more level to distinguish from mine above, and this one is an additional level more than yours. A different way of spacing comments is everyone sticks with a specific heading level (i.e. I would always post with no indent, you would use one), but it's much less common.

What problems are you having? I don't think I can edit your monobook directly, but I may be able to look at it. Note that popups is only one of several nav tools available. Some people use Twinkle, User:Wikidudeman has created his own called hodgepodge which mixes several and he's extremely eager to get feedback. WLU 22:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, thank you! I'm starting to understand now! I have the main idea of how to get popups, I think! Andy pyro 22:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

NGHS

There is truth is some articles such as on Nanyang Girls' High School — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.48.73.89 (talk • contribs)

Then source it and stop just reverting. WLU 19:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Further - if it is a notably important bit of information and not just an attempt to put up information you consider amusing, it should appear on the school's website or other source. A source will mean an end to the back and forth reverting. Currently it just looks like you enjoy the information being on the page for God knows what reason, and given your contribution history with multiple warnings on your talk page, that means a very quick revert. Consider a) finding a source and b) getting an account. WLU 19:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Hodgepodge

You should just try importing it directly, opposed to copying everything in the file itself. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 14:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't even know what that means, do you have a wikilink to spare me the time?

FYI, I'm having a go at your editor review. It's tough. WLU 14:39, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

You could follow the directions here: User:Wikidudeman/Hodgepodge. Or simply do this:

1. Remove everything from your monobook file.

2. Add this to it:

//
 
// [[User:Wikidudeman/wikidudemandeluxe.js]]      
importScript('User:Wikidudeman/wikidudemandeluxe.js');
 
//

3. Save it.

4. Hold "Shift" and press reload while holding shift until the page is done reloading. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 15:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll give it a go, and try it tonight. Will I be able to revert between popups and HP using undo? I may have to switch depending on if I'm using IE or FF. WLU 16:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow. That has done some weird things to my tabs, and I've lost popups again. I'll try to keep you posted on what comes out tonight. WLU 16:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Popups works with it. It should work as well, but Twinkle rollbacks and reverts are a lot faster. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 16:09, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry WDM, at least with IE popups do not work, and I've yet to access the Twinkle functions. I'll have a gander at home. WLU 16:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

You need to be on firefox. This is how it should look. It's a screenshot. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 16:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd love to be, but until work OK's the installation of FF (not going to happen), I'm stuck with two different browsers. Hopefully I'll have some good things to say after I try it out tonight. From what I've seen at home, it does look pretty useful. WLU 16:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis

Dear WLU, Many people have tried to engage in discussion with Jfdwolff on his "vandalism" of the Myalgic Encephalomyelitis page, with constant redirects to the CFS page. Please see Talk:Myalgic encephalomyelitis - I was updating this as you reverted my changes... Kmclellan 01:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I trust Jfdwolff, an admin with whom I've had many dealings, far more than a redlinked user who verges on a single purpose account and thinks the RFC is a vote. If ME and CFS are distinct entities, reference it in reliable sources or attempt to find a consensus rather than reverting and reverting and reverting. Reliable sources will be far more useful than debating. If the problems are not documented in reliable sources, it is possible that it is premature, or original research to insist on a position that is not held by the majority of researchers. Better is to discuss the controversy, documenting with reliable sources, on the talk page, or perhaps draw up a draft on a subpage and have discussion there. I've yet to see anything that convinced me there is a need for two articles. WLU 11:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Malazan

I think we should go through the characters and write their story since no other site has in great length. However, how do we determine who is fit and who is not; for example, Withal he forges the sword for the Crippled God and is a living survivor of the third city of Meckros, but is a fairly minor character. Or Kulp who is a squad mage and sends the Coastal Guard for Heboric. Thus, who is worth to be on the page?

Also how do you create new pages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krmarshall (talk • contribs) 03:25, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

The major characters or groups can be given their own pages, such as The Bridgeburners and Anomander Rake. Dancer already has his own page for instance. Other characters can be combined into single pages, like the Races of the Malazan Book of the Fallen have been. The page would probably be called Minor characters in the Malazan Book of the Fallen. It'd doubtless be a very, very long page. You could look at what has been done for other books for examples by the way (i.e. check out the pages that link to A Song of Ice and Fire. Don't look at The Sword of Truth pages, they look like they were written by illiterate fifth graders. Withal and Kulp would be good candidates for 'minor characters', while Heboric would be a main one.

New pages are created in one of two ways:

• If a redlink exists on a page, click on the red link and it opens a new window with its own edit pane. Start editing and save per normal. You could star The Bridgeburners page using the above redlink.
• Type in the name of the page; make sure you use proper capitalization per the capitalization guidelines. There will be two redlinks at the top of the page, one following "You searched for:", the other that says "You can create this page". Click on either link and edit as normal.

Also, it's always handy to have guidelines. WP:BOOK has guidelines for books I think, and as I said, the other pages work as guides. Pick good ones though, ASOIAF I've been quite impressed with as I said above. Plus, it's always good to review wikipedia policies, like WP:FICT for fictional pages, and the WP:5P in general. WLU 11:26, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, don't forget to sign your posts and it would probably be handy to review the talk page guidelines - they make it much easier to understand communication on talk pages. WLU 11:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

It was Kimloc's song invested into the shell that Fiddler was given that started the 'singing', once broke, which both Kalam and 'Strings' heard. That is the same book in which the Bridgeburners came back to fight as ghosts. Also heres a quote from Deadhouse Gates, "There is in a Tano song the potential for Ascendancy...". However, in MoI Paran does say, "All right, it's probably far too late. But I bless you, one and all." (p 765, TOR softback) Krmarshall 17:41, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

True, but wasn't the song responsible for them being able to fight as ghosts, while it was Paran's blessing that boosted them to ascendancy? The two events were contemporaneous in the Malazan timeline. I'll have to re-read sections to be sure (if I make the time), and it's always possible that the question can't be answered, now or ever. I think the answer could be found in Bonehunters when Paran calls them out of lake Raraku perhaps, in Paran's conversation with Hedge. The tano song has the potential, but so does the blessing of the Master of the Deck. Unfortunately, encyclopedia malazica is silent on this from what I can find. Too bad we don't have Erikson to ask. WLU 17:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Edit conflict - the Paran thing from MoI is what I remember as being resp. WLU 17:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the complement

Hey WLU,

Thanks for complementing me on fixing a typo rather than vandalizing a page:

It's nice to see someone who is actually correcting a typo rather than just using it as an excuse for vandalism :) WLU 00:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty new to Wikipedia and it's nice to know that there's a community of people like you that are somehow able to stay sane and welcome new users through the explosion of WP. I try to put back what I get in by doing small edits for clarity or grammar (I like linguistics), but it's also nice to know that there are some heavy lifters around, too.

Thanks,

Justin

Your new Status Template

I've fixed your Status page for you. I created User:WLU/StatusTemplate, which is required for it to work. I used the same style as mine, You can change it if you want. Now it looks like this opposed to simply having a redlink saying "Status template" as it did before. I also put it on your userpage for you. Feel free to revert it or remove it if you want. Or you can ask me how to put it somewhere else or change it's style, etc. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 12:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah, gracias. I may remove it simply because my time on wikipedia tends to be rather unpredictable and I'm almost certainly going to forget about updating it. I appreciate having the option though, thanks for the fix. WLU 13:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I frequently forget also. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 13:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

My Bad

Taylor423 17:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC) I apologize for sticking my neck in where it doesn't belong, at least not yet. New user. My boss was tired of incorrect info appearing on the page and wants to fix it. However, while our publications are referenced, our website does not list its references. So we have decided to reference our website properly and attain HON certification before making changes to this site. I will have to learn proper protocol. Again, apologies. Lots to learn here. Thanks for being understanding.

This changes things significantly. If it is your website, you should not be adding it in the first place, per our conflict of interest guidelines. If the information on the page is incorrect, you, as a citizen or editor, can correct it through referral to relaible sources. As a representative of an organization however, editing to conform to your point of view is a violation of our policy on a neutral point of view. If your publications are referenced, they could be added by another editor if they are found to be accurate and pass review. But not by you.

Your signature should also appear at the end of your statement. It's less important than the above policies, it just makes it easier for other editors.

Finally, fibromyalgia, like many diseases and conditions, is a very powerful topic for many people, and can lead to biased editing, or edit warring. Please review the five pillars of wikipedia, as well as the policies on conflict of interest, reliable sources, neutral point of view and the talk page guidelines - it will make it easier on your future contributions. Also, WP:FRINGE may be appropriate to look at, depending on how main-stream your organizations approach to FM is. WLU 17:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's not my MY website. I was just asked to figure out Wikipedia and edit . The journal this woman produces is medically reviewed, written and referenced from research articles on PubMed relating to fibromyalgia. I don't think she will have any problem with content and referencing. Personally, I am only concerned about some of the things I read on that website. They are not correct. The first thing I noted was reference No.1."It is not contagious, and recent studies suggest that people with fibromyalgia may be genetically predisposed.[1]" but the link to ref 1 goes to nothing that references this statement. However, there is "some" evidence of genetic predisposition, and as an editor I would place the proper reference to the research, but I am afraid to do this. I know that's what this website is all about, but who am I going to piss off in the process.? Taylor423 20:39, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Your statement still puts you in WP:COI, enormously so. Incidentally, try this page of the pamphlet, which does indeed justify the statement - my guess would be people linked to the 'whole pamphlet' rather than the sub-page for ease of referencing - you have to read a couple pages to get to that particular bit of info, but by using the start page, you can reference the whole pamphlet. Not the best solution, but one that makes sense to me. (If the link is kaput, go through the pamphlet until you get to the page entitled "What Causes Fibromyalgia". If you have pubmed articles, particularly 2007 ones, that justify the statement better, add them. No-one is going to be pissed off by the addition of peer-reviewed sources from pubmed. Use this link, all you need is the pubmed id, put it between <ref></ref> tags next to the statement it is justifying, and you shouldn't piss anyone off. The sincere addition of good information won't make anyone mad, they'll just use it to improve the article and fix any mistakes you make. Be sure to use talk pages however, part of why I was pissed off was because you kept reverting without discussing, despite repeated messages to your talk page. If you want to frustrate people, ignore their messages unless the threaten to block you - it's frustrating for me and makes ME look bad. WLU 01:05, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Certainly not intended. Just ignorance on my part. All excellent suggestions. It Can be a good informational site. thanks Taylor423 21:17, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

The Bridgeburners

Thanks for your note. I looked at the article again, and it looks much better. Cheers, --Bradeos Graphon 17:23, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Lovely, glad to have an outside opinion. WLU 17:32, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Anon comment

Thank you so much for responding and the suggestions. (here_) I appreciate your response and I am not offended. By the way, you mentioned you are his former adopter? What does that mean? 99.225.102.106 03:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a program that is designed to help new users learn quickly and integrate more smoothly with the wikipedia community at large. It's at WP:ADOPT. I basically provided suggestions, looked over edits, and generally tried to help them learn what every wikipedian knows, but faster. Then two months later they drop out of the project and I never hear from them again :) Something about me I guess. WLU 04:47, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Henckels comment

We get a lot of people who ask about the friodur ice hardening process that is used in manufacturing some of henckels knives. would it be ok to post information about how this process is accomplished?