User talk:Freechild/Archive1

	Archive
	Freechild • Talk • DYKs • Favorites • Contribs • Workspace 1 • 2 • Archives: 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 •

You can click here to leave me a new message. I will reply on this page unless you request otherwise.

ARCHIVE 1 August 20, 2005 to April 9, 2007

Ephebiphobia Article

I edited in a section about Iran's recent reactionary Ephebiphobia. If you could check and make sure its okay....I'm still getting used to Wiki-writing. Also, I thought about adding that the Phillipine's raised it to 18 from 16 after the EDSA revolution, but i could find no sources that contend it was Ephebiphobic. It might have been simply a minor consitituional change, but if you can find anything that indicates otherwise, i think that would be a good add as well.Theowannabe 05:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)Chip[reply]

American Youth Congress

I am very interested. There is a couple of chapter devoted to it in a very interesting book i picked up called When the Old Left was Young: Student Radicals and the First Mass Student Movement(http://www.amazon.com/When-Old-Left-Was-Young/dp/0195111362/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-6105888-7957526?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1175293819&sr=1-1) by Professor Robert Cohen. It has tons of great info and sources. I haven't gotten to those chapter yet, but when i do i will definiatly help. Also, I'm interested in doing an article on the National Student League, which was the predessor of the AYC. Theowannabe 22:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)Chip[reply]

North Omaha Article

Hi Freechild!

Your transformation of the North Omaha article is nothing short of spectacular. I received your message on my talk page. Sorry I am getting back late -- I have been oversaturated with work lately. I would love to help in anyway I can. There may be a few things we could do to organize the page to make it less lengthy. Let me think on it for bit.

Regards,

--Prometheusfire 22:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A welcome from Sango123

Hello, Freechild/Archive1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
Simplified Ruleset
How to edit a page
Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Naming conventions
Manual of Style
Wikipedia Glossary
If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also the Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy Wiki-ing!

-- Sango 123 22:14, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

Re: Quick ?

You may want to take a look at Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit, but that service is currently suspended and has been for quite a while. A present alternative you could take is to create a user page linking to your IP addresses' contributions. By the way, please type four tildes (~~~~) after your messages on talk pages. It generates a signature showing your username and a timestamp, which will look like this: Freechild 19:08, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regards, Sango 123 (talk) 15:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Deleted article makes a comeback

Hi, Adam. You can see what happened to the original student voice article in the logs. Old revisions of the article can no longer be accessed in the history, but if you'd like, I can restore a deleted version into your userspace for you to work on. Sango 123 13:50, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sango. If you'd restore that deleted version I'm ready to work from it. Thanks. Freechild 02:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

North Omaha Additions

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that the edits/additions on the North Omaha article are awesome. Thanks for your contributions.

Prometheusfire 21:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article you created is up for deletion

Hi Freechild, I just thought I'd let you know that one of the articles you created last month, namely Pedophobia, has been tagged as an article for deletion. You can find the current debate here. Cheers! Budgiekiller 18:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Generations

I deleted the articles concerned because they read like advertisements/promotional material, (not just because they were companies) with lots of POV phrasing. There is nothing to stop you recreating, since the pages are not protected, but if you do it might be an idea to make them more neutral in tone.

More seriously, Generation YES had previously been deleted by another admin as a copyright violation from here with no indication of permission. I don't know whether that issue had been addressed prior to my deletion, but if not, you cannot repost it, or any other copyright infringement material.

I won't restore, since it's better if you recreate with the issues above addressed, but if you haven't saved the text I can retrieve it for you. Jimfbleak.talk.15:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advocacy re: deletion

There isn't much I can do that you aren't already. You are doing exactly what you should be doing - making valid and substantive arguments as to why the article should be kept and hope to convince Wikipedians of its merit. Your comments and those of others have swayed me and I have voted to keep, but other than that, I do not believe there is much you can do but continue to make your case, which you are doing well. - Jord 16:19, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about the review. Deleted text retrieved is here Jimfbleak.talk.06:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not blank pages, use removal procedure instead

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content, as you did to Students as education decision-makers. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. AttishOculus 08:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to the bot edit above, I did no wrong, as I did redirect it to an appropriate existing page. Wohoo, vanquished by a bot. - 15:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Fletcher

Criticism: I reviewed the referenced and didn't find any particular cricicism of Fletcher. Therefore I deleted the section wih this summary. Book: If written in cooperation, write so in parantheses. By default, is authors are not indicated, then the sole authorsip is assumed. While we at it, my "voice of integrity" wants to tell you that the references provided for proof of notability are quite shaky: unless I missed something, they only cursorily mention Fletcher. You better quickly find a larger third-party text that has at least a full paragraph about Fletcher, otherwise the article borders on original research and hence at a risk of re-deletion. `'mikka 04:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just Wondering

Is this the National Youth Rights Association's VP Adam? If so, nice to see that you edit Wikipedia! If not, sorry, but I still appreciate your additions to youth rights topics. J0lt C0la 04:02, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

edit summary

Please provide an edit summary for each change you make to an article. Thanks, John Vandenberg 04:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pedophobia or Pedaphobia?

Or pediaphobia?

Cut 'n paste moves

Please don't change article titles by cutting and pasting the content. That has the effect of losing all the of the contribution history which is required for compliance with Wikipedia's GFDL. Instead, use the "move this page" link on your sidebar. I've fixed the "Student Voice" article. -Will Beback · † · 19:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback

I appreciate your feedback. The Teaching for social justice article is an extended essay. I am part of a cohort of teachers who thought it would be cool to do this article in fulfillment of a project through our college. That being said, I understand the article doesn't meet wiki's standards for a bunch of stuff. I have writen two sections of the article, and there are 5 other principle contributors to the article. I know the concept of teaching for social justice is it self politically non-nuetral, yet I think the article doesn't attempt to really approach the subject in a nuetral manner. We'll see what happens. I'm glad people are noticing though. Thanks again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jevergreen (talk • contribs) 11:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for your continued support to the Teaching for social justice article. The discussion page sure is wild. People are responding the way you thought they would. It's sad that the conversation is not about making the article better. Anyway, I responded a little to skaraoke. I hope the article lasts.Jevergreen 02:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You rock

I didn't realize your additions to Teaching for social justice. Thanks. That's great. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jevergreen (talk • contribs) 11:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Good question... ...I think critical pedagogy is one aspect of teaching for social justice. I see that teaching for social justice encompases more than pedagogical decisions by the teacher. So maybe joining articles would be beneficial... ...The critical pedagogy article is a good example of NPOV, yeah?-Jevergreen 12:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

North Omaha template

I'm a bit overwhelmed with all the new articles about Omaha and North Omaha, and I haven't been able to get them all onto my watchlist or look them over. I'm hoping you feel free to edit the templates I made today, as well as create a template similar to {{Omaha}} for North Omaha, so that we (I) can keep better track of what is going on, as well as navigate from subarticle to subarticle with ease. Hopefully you like the new ones, BTW. Thanks, Smmurphy^(Talk) 05:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

editing this week

Hey, keep it up. I'm just writing a quick note to let you know that I've been a bit busy the last day or two, and will continue to be so on and off for the next week. I'll try to respond to issues brought up at the talk pages, but I won't be able to spend much time looking up references and making substantial edits for a few days, and I don't want you to think that I've abandoned you to labor alone. Smmurphy^(Talk) 04:49, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the encouragement. I'm working up some more goods, including an article on Prospect Hill Cemetery that I'm pretty excited about. I am also looking for more "lost towns" and neighborhoods around Omaha, like Saratoga. I'll look forward to seeing your work coming through. - Freechild 04:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting a bit humorous, as information gets more and more comprehensive. I guess I used to know Stan Baumann, the caretaker at Prospect Hill. But its a good thing. I'm looking forward to seeing your article. The cemetery is in the news every few months due to vandalism, but its actually pretty important, eh. I can't imagine what will have an article next. Do you have a todo list for North Omaha related articles? Here are a few that we still need: Brenda Council, Ken Vavrina, OPPD, Dodge and Hummel Park. I was going to write more, but I saw the most of those as redlinks at Landmarks in North Omaha, Nebraska. If you don't already have a todo list, you should make one in your userspace. Smmurphy^(Talk) 05:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've enjoyed your work knitting together youth empowerment themes. Due to my work on the Community High School, Ann Arbor, Michigan article, I've become interested in other 1970s educational experiments that operated on the "school without walls" or "city as classroom" principle, as well as on free school principles. If you come across information on the Chicago High School for Metropolitan Studies (est. 1969) -- or any other forerunners -- please let me know, as I understand it was very influential among many similar experiments during the 1970s, and would like to add something on this. Looking forward to reading more of your stuff. Ropcat 22:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response! -- and also for the book reference. One other thing: I noticed that you just added Category:Free Schools to Pioneer High School, Ann Arbor, Mich. That school isn't a free school as I understand the term from reading the free school article, but rather a very large traditional high school. (Did you mean to put the tag on Community High School, Ann Arbor, Michigan? Or perhaps I misunderstand "free school"...) Best, Ropcat 20:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see! Didn't realize you were referring to Pioneer II (a.k.a. Earthworks). I wrote that section (under heading "Merger with Earthworks" in the Community High article, and then the shorter version in the Pioneer article), and it didn't occur to me that you were referring to that particular project with your free-school category on Pioneer High. (Although actually, according to the old news articles I dug up, Pioneer II didn't merge with Pioneer; it branched off from Pioneer, was renamed "Earthworks," and then was merged with Community High when its enrollment got too low.) Interesting project, I heard their school color (by student vote) was "clear." Ropcat 01:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP Etiquette

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Talk:Teaching for social justice. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors, as you did here: Talk:Teaching for social justice. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

- Skaraoke 05:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on Giroux

Hey, just wanted to thank you for the work you put in on Henry Giroux. I sure didn't want to spend any more time on him than I had to for the essay I was writing, but CopyVios just can't stand. And your new content is better than what was there before anyway. InsaneNewman 06:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of Racial Tension in Omaha, Nebraska

Awsome work! futurebird 22:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your edits

I regret that your energy for disparaging commentary and editing is consuming my energy for WP. At this point I am not going to revert the edits you made to School of Education because I do not particularly care for that article; however, in reverting my edits you clearly violated WP policy and demonstrated a clear contempt for WP cultural norms. An article does not belong to any one editor; as you are aware, this is a community process. Your reverts to my edits were done autocratically and contemptuously. Read my edits to that article closer, and you will see that they were wholly done for the benefit of the article - not detraction. I am going to mark the category uncategorized, and I am going to replace the globalize tag, because they are both true w/o opinion. However, I will not contribute any further to that article at this point. I would like you to consider discontinuing your vehement disdain for my efforts on WP, and I will do the same. Otherwise, I will take this to mediation. - Freechild 05:59, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

You seem not to have noticed that I restored elements of your last version of the article separately in subsequent edits that I made. Before I did that, I reverted to SmackBot's edit of the article because that was the last version that was not generated by someone who had an obvious axe to grind and/or a vendetta against me. (Bots are nice that way.) Given your recent obnoxious, harassing behavior and your involvement in a personal vanity page, you don't have too much credibility on the subject of "WP cultural norms," so to paraphrase a wise sage, my own counsel will I keep on WP cultural norms. I really hope you do something about this persecution complex of yours, mainly for my benefit since I'm just plain tired of being harassed by you. - Skaraoke 06:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Someone Else's Comments

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-03-30 The Freechild Project, you will be blocked from editing. Except for formatting changes, it is not acceptable to edit someone else's comments.

For all outside readers, the above tag was placed on this page by User:Skaraoke after I undid his deletion of a comment from a mediation: "If this happens again, I am going to go for serious administrative sanctions. Just so we're clear, Freechild, that is a threat." He has placed the above vandalism tag on here in retribution and to continue this messiness. - Freechild 03:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/School of Education.

For the Mediation Committee, ^demon^{[omg plz]}

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 08:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

Urban decay

I think that by globalizing the topic, and by looking for early historical examples the "racist" aspects of Urban decay will become less important. I do have qualms about this organization. I'm open to ideas and suggestions, but I don't want the topic to be hidden... you know. People need to talk about this. futurebird 09:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History mover

Yep, I've tagged that article too. In the future, use the "move" tab at the top of every page. --Rory096 06:28, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mess with George

I think I'm on to you, dude. See Talk:George Washington (inventor).--Pharos 13:17, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fears of youth, children, etc.

I don't see any value in your proposal for a template on "discrimination against young people." If you create such a template, do not include Fear of childbirth. Fear of childbirth has far more to do with fear of pain than with a woman's attitude toward children.

A significant reason for my concern with your articles and templates is that your POV strongly pervades so many of them. Can you accept that at least some of adults' restrictive behavior toward youth has positive motivation (not just negative motives such as "adultism" and "fear" and "discrimination against")?

I would support your idea for a new template if you were to broaden your focus to the more neutrally-labeled topic Status of Youth -- to incorporate some (but not all) of the elements in your Youth empowerment template, plus Compulsory education, Child labor, Age of majority, Age of consent, Age of criminal responsibility, Emancipation of minors, Legal drinking age, Marriageable age, Voting age, Raising Of School Leaving Age, Legal working age, Prostitution of children, Child soldiers, and myriad related articles that I'm sure you will be able to find.
--orlady 16:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't actually believe that that adultism or adultcentrism are always bad, per se. I don't want bars to be made up like high school locker rooms, or my clothes to look like a teenagers'. That much said, ephebiphobia is never good, per se. I think I will start a template called Template:Perspectives on Youth as to avoid the POV inherent in any delineation of the "status of youth". Thanks for your opinion and advice. - Freechild 17:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the POV in inherent in "status of youth"? "Status" means "state or condition" (see http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=status ). The legal status of youth is a dry encyclopedic topic. In contrast, "Perspectives" are "points of view" (see http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=perspective ). I think you have things backwards -- "status" is value-neutral, while "perspectives" is the title of a newspaper's editorial page (where points of view are presented). --orlady 18:18, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Status is "A person’s position or standing relative to that of others," with relative being the operative word here, because what is relative depends on judgment[1]. Perspective is the choice of a single point of view from which to sense, categorize, measure or codify experience[2]. To further muddy things up, this conversation is a matter of perspective - which relies on how you and I see things. It is not dependent upon status, which implies an order of priority, rank or privilege. Any statement about the "status" of youth would do the same thing.

I choose to rely on authoritative dictionaries for my definitions of terms, not Wiktionary. I stand by my perspective that status refers to state or condition, and thus is a value-neutral title for a collection of encyclopedic articles that include statistics, legal information, articles on issues and situations, etc. In contrast, "perspectives" identifies a collection of opinion pieces. --orlady 18:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Hey, Freechild, are you affiliated with The Freechild Project and CommonAction? (Your "handle" and the close alignment of your interests with the project's interests makes that seem likely.) If so, do be mindful of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (and related guidelines such as Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:No original research). It's tough to do an objective job on topics that one is exceptionally passionate about. Interactions with folks like me might go more smoothly if you disclosed your personal connections with specific articles. (For what it's worth, I stay anonymous around here, but most of my work has been on things about which I have at most only peripheral interest.)--orlady 14:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to your comment on my talk page--orlady 17:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-03-30 School of Education

Replied on my talk page. --KZ^{Talk• Contribs} 22:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]