User talk:Jeffrey Newman

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Jeffrey Newman, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Longhair | Talk 15:46, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hello, and here's my human welcome. I'm unsure what you mean by 'how often do I check for answers'?. If you mean how are you notified of messages on your Talk page, a message should have appeared to bring you right back here to read this message now. You'll receive notifications during wiki usage when your talk page is updated with user messages. If you have any further questions, be sure to fire away. I'm happy to help. -- Longhair | Talk 16:04, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Welcome #2

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! -- Essjay · talk 21:09, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

David Holt

I saw your message on my talk page, and so you didn't have to worry, I came and found you! I did a bit of research on David Holt, and if what I've found is about the same individual, I think you may have found the right place. From what I can find, he published several texts on Jung, including:

The Psychology of Carl Jung: Essays in Application and Deconstruction
Jung and Marx
Several articles for the Harvest International Journal for Jungian Studies published by the C.G. Jung Analytical Psychology Club London

If this is the same person, then I believe you may have the basis for a Wikipedia article. I suggest you write an article and make a special point to include information that shows why this individual deserves to be included. Talk about his writings, any significant contributions to the field of Jungian analysis (did he make some huge discovery or breakthrough, or was the first to suggest a now commonly believed idea about Jung?), and do it as objectively as possible.

Since this would be your first article, my suggestion is that instead of writing the article in the main encyclopedia right away, write it in a space where you can edit it and I can help you review it before it is posted. If you follow this link I have reserved you a private spot in my userspace for you to draft the article. If you have any questions, leave me a note on my talk page. (There are some other issues I would like to discuss with you about this article, but I won't overwhealm your talk page with them now. We can discuss them later.)

Your original post mentioned that you (and others?) want to get a website going for this individual. I want to make a specific note that Wikipedia is only for encyclopedia articles; if you're looking for a place for a website specifically for David Holt, I can help you find another server where you can start one.

You also mentioned his writings, and I want to bring two other Wikimedia projects to your attention: Wikisource and Wikibooks Any works that are not currently under copyright, or the copyright holder is willing to release them under the GNU Free Documentation License, can be included in one of these two projects. Previously published works are archived at Wikisource. If the works are previously unpublished, they can be included at Wikibooks. If you are interested, I can explain more about this.

I realize this is a lot to work through, so read through it and then drop by my talk page with any questions. I hope I can expect to see a David Holt article soon! Yours, Essjay · talk 21:09, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

One more thing...

I saw your message to Longhair's talk page and I wanted to make sure you know; any time someone leaves you a message on your talk page, you'll get the orange bar across the top of your screen that tells you you have new messages. If you click on the blue underlined text that says "new messages" it will bring you back to this page immediately. Essjay · talk 21:16, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

From me?

What do I do? I have never anywhere seen, except on Wikipedia that Ludwig Wittgenstein 'he became a passionate convert to Christianity'? I consider this either a 'serious error' or that we need sources!

I did a quick Yahoo! search to see if I could find any sources that seemed to back up the claim. The closest I found was this site. From that page:

Russell wrote that in the days before 1914, Wittgenstein
"had been dogmatically anti-Christian, but in this respect he changed completely. The only thing he ever told me about this was that once in a village in Galicia during the war he found a bookshop containing only one book, which was Tolstoy on the Gospels. He bought the book, and, according to him, it influenced him profoundly."
Bertrand Russell, "Ludwig Wittgenstein", in the journal Mind, July 1951, p. 298.

There are other quotes on the page that support the claim that he was baptized Catholic, and that his family considered him a Christian. What I did was run a Ctrl-F search for "Christian" so I could find where that word appeared on the page.

If you dispute the cliam, put a note on the article's talk page asking the contributor to cite his/her source. Use something like:

"I saw in the article the claim that Wittgenstein became a devout but doubting Christian after reading Tolstoy's commentary on the Gospel. I've never heard this claim before. Does someone have a source for this?"

Make sure you "watch" the page (click the tab at the top that says "watch") so it will show up on your watchlist (fourth link at the very top of your page "my watchlist") when someone makes a post. (Of course, that means you'll have to check your watchlist regularly to see if anyone has posted).

I hope this helps! Essjay · Talk 16:13, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Oh, by the way

I meant to tell you: Don't forget to sign your posts on talk pages with ~~~ (three tildes) if you want just your signature (Jeffrey Newman) or ~~~~ (four tildes) for your signature and the date (like mine; this is the option most pages prefer.) That way, other users will know that you are the one who has made the comment. Also, if you post some information about yourself on your user page then your signature will appear as a blue link rather than the red link. -- Essjay · Talk 09:46, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Promised Link

As I said in my email, here is the link to the answer to your Wittgenstein question: Talk:Ludwig_Wittgenstein#Passionate_Convert.3F

Cheers, Essjay · Talk 05:02, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

User Page

I saw your additions to your user page, and I checked the code. It looked like you wanted to make the text look like this:

New to Wikipedia June 2005
Interests: Philosophy
Hobbies:Music
Work:Knowledge Management
I have little technical expertise and am presently needing any help available.
I hope to develop this page as I learn more.
Presently I'm asking myself - and you - about the benefits and drawbacks of peudonyms on Wiki.

but it came out looking like this:

New to Wikipedia June 2005 Interests: Philosophy Hobbies:Music Work:Knowledge Management I have little technical expertise and am presently needing any help available. I hope to develop this page as I learn more. Presently I'm asking myself - and you - about the benefits and drawbacks of peudonyms on Wiki.

If you want to start a new line in your text, you can either enter a blank line in between the text, or you can use </br> at the end of the line. Hit "edit this page" at the top to see the difference in the text. Hope this helps. -- Essjay · Talk 05:57, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Getting There

You're welcome! I remember when I was a new user and I wish I'd had more help. I guess I still am a new user, in some ways; I've only been here about two months, but I'm coming up on 1000 edits (this is #981) so I don't think I can really call myself "new." Anyhow, yes, "cut & paste" still works, and I'm glad to help out.

I decided to go for anonymity for a couple of reasons. First, while I subscribe to the belief that having credentials makes one a more convincing editor (there are editors here who don't believe credentials are important, but I do), I don't necessarily think having credentials means you have to say where they are from. Second, I don't know how well my university, and my department in particular, might take to having me running about the internet giving away my expertise for free. Also, I don't know how it might conflict with publishing rights. Finally, by being anonymous, I don't have to have any mistakes here (and yes, they do happen) associated with me professionally.

Wikipedia is quite addictive; I usually contribute while watching TV or doing other tasks. When classes begin again in the fall, I will have to cut back my contributions some, as my students might not take well to me cancelling class so I can keep contributing here. (Tenure isn't that strong!)

"The interface between 'new' and 'old,' particularly for those of us involved with traditional and evolving religious life and structures is central for me." I'm not exactly sure what you're asking here; could you clarify?

Anyhow, good to have you around, and feel free to let me know if you need any more help. -- Essjay · Talk 06:37, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Screen Name

You know, if I keep dropping in advice out of the blue, you're going to start to think I'm stalking you...

At the risk of being called a stalker, I saw your query about screen names. A screen name, in the simplist terms, is the name you go by online. In particular, they are names that various users employ to avoid using thier real names. (For example, "Essjay" is my screen name.) Sometimes the screen name is the same as the real name (this is the case with Jimbo Wales, the founder of Wikipedia) and sometimes it is a pseudonym (like mine). Your screen name is, obviously, Jeffrey Newman. -- Essjay · Talk 16:19, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

reply to your pov question

I replied to your question about my answer about psychoanalysis at the ref desk. I think most of us use very different pov criteria when answering questions at the ref desk compared to writing articles. I have no qualms about making a pov clear as part of my answer, but I try to provide the answer to the question asked. Generally for "community pages" like ref desk, and talk pages, there is no need to take an "encyclopedic voice" and try to represent all pov. I think psychoanalysis is not worth much as a medical theory and treatment (which was its origin and original purpose), but I don't really care enough to fight about it at psychoanalysis and I havent even looked at the article to see if my viewpoint (which is certainly widely held now) is even represented in it. You are free to disagree, but I didn't think there were many hard core defenders of psychoanalysis left. I don't mind a good argument if it's about substance and not stupid, but I normally try to avoid doing it in article text. Welcome to wikipedia by the way. alteripse 21:59, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hannah Arendt

i habe answered on my discussion page. however, in the enlish wikiquote there is nothing about her but on the german: http://de.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hannah_Arendt --Ot 12:29, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

VFD and namespaces

Thanks for your talk page message. VFD is a shortcut for Wikipedia:Votes for deletion, a page where votes are taken whether articles should remain on Wikipedia or not.

You were also having difficulty linking to pages in other namespaces. As you can see, the VFD page is in the Wikipedia namespace. User pages are in the User namespace, and IZAK's userpage is therefore User:IZAK. To link to his talk page, link User_talk:IZAK.

I hope this is helpful. Please don't hesitate to call on me again. JFW | T@lk 14:18, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Philosophy project

No, the original comment wasn't mine, just the remark that Foucault is not nearly as difficult as Lacan or Derrida. I've added a pseudo sig to the original comment to make that clear. -- Jmabel | Talk 16:14, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

Agamben

Hi Jeffrey I'm not really that interested in Agamben - I really dislike his thought, basically. You might want to check out Wikipedia:WikiProject_Critical_Theory - you could collaborate with people there on what's hot, and maybe add Agamben to collaborate with others on whatever you want to do. XmarkX 02:44, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

OK - did not initally understand what you meant by 'numbers' - the numbers you speak of are IP addresses. Every computer has one, and that is how wikipedia registers the ownership of changes made by someone who is not logged in to Wikipedia - crazy though it may seem, absolutely anyone can edit wikipedia, and this is how the do it. XmarkX 06:27, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Christianity & Yoga

Thanks for the note Jeffrey; Jondel asked me about that a while back and as I told him, I don't have particular expertise in the field, but I'm happy to help.

As for why his name was redlinked, when you link to a user's page, you have to prefix it with "User:", as in User:Essjay. Most of the time, we "pipe" links so they say something different. Thus, [[User:Essjay|Essjay]] shows up on the page as Essjay. The correct place the link should go (i.e., my user page) is listed first, while what I want the link to say (i.e., just my username) goes after the "pipe" symbol: | (This symbol is usually on the same key as the \, and often looks like a broken line). This way, we can link to a relevant article without having to display the article name. Here's an example: "Here's how to learn to use Wikipedia." instead of having to say: "Here's how to Help:Contents learn to use Wikipedia."

I checked out Xiong, and if I understand correctly, what your asking about is the disambiguation page. Sometimes, when there is more than one article that should have the same title, we set up a disambiguation page that lists all the articles that should have that title, so they can easily be found.

If you have more questions, let me know. -- Essjay · Talk 02:52, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Photos and pseudonyms

Hi, Jeffrey,

I just happened to find a site that collects photographs that are available for general use and that site appears to have done an excellent job of categorizing photos on Wikipedia. I saw many spider pictures there that I had not located in my own efforts. (They may be on the English Wikipedia, however, I'll have to check.) I've also gone through the jpg images one by one, or at least started on that task. There are a huge number of them.

As for chosing another name-- I originally chose to use my own name (or a slightly altered version of it for which there are historical reasons). The trouble is that some of my students found out about it, and sometimes the topics I discuss are controversial. So I would rather not have side issues in the classroom and I have started to give myself a split personality ;-)

There are a certain number of people on Wikipedia who are destructive. You may protect yourself from malevolent acts if the destructive can't do anything worse than trash your user home page. So far I have not had any big problems, but I have also learned to not characterize other people or respond when they try to get me angry.

The useful thing for KnowledgeBoard would probably be to find out whether there are sites in languages other than English and Chinese. I looked at a few easy places and didn't find anything, but areas where English is not widely used may have sites entirely in their own languages and those could be linked to the Wikipedia Commons site. Also, if you have any relevant graphs or pictures that can be uploaded there with some kind of "free use" permission given, that could be very helpful. For instance, there may be a useful graph of total membership over the last x number of years. It might be copyrighted, however.

Best,

Pat

This comes from the comment below that I posted on Pat's site referring to his contribution on Knowledge Management

Good to see your comment though it might take me a while to 'unpack' it, being new to all this. I'm not clear on the links, if any, between the e-mail, the Master Control Panel (sounds terrifying) and Knowledge Management (maybe that does, too!). Culture Wars certainly takes us to Star Wars domaine, but thanks for the welcome!

PS Have you been looking at the spiders on the Wikipedia - Reference Desk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk (I can't get that quite right, but at least you'll know where I mean) Jeffrey Newman 06:20, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Before I get on to what I came to say (below) let me offer a tip: What you wanted was [[Wikipedia:Reference desk]], which renders as Wikipedia:Reference desk. The easiest way to do a straight link like that is to go to the page you're wanting to link to, highlight the page title (at the top of the page), copy & paste it where you want to put it, and put the [[ ]] square brackets around it. -- Essjay · Talk 06:15, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Xiong

Hi Jeffrey:

I found what you were talking about: User talk:Xiong. I'm not exactly sure what it was that concerned you; I see two areas of possible concern.

First, is the "deletion" notice: This is not anything to be concerned over; it's a prank that the user knows about. (If you follow the link to the "votes" page, you can see the header "Bad Jokes and Other Nonsense." That's a tip off that whatever is there isn't serious.) You'll find a lot of this "tongue in cheek" sort of thing on here. See here for his comments.

Second, are the user's comments. It seems to me the user may be fed up. On occasion, users here get fed up because something doesn't go their way, or they get targeted by someone for some controversial act, or they get tired of any of the myriad of things that makes Wikipedia what it is: bureaucracy, vandalism, open editing, etc. When they do, they leave. Some take a break and then return, others throw their hands up in the air and run screaming. It's unfortunate when it happens, but there isn't anything that can be done.

Honestly, I think the best thing for you would be to leave him alone; if he's really fed up enough to leave, he won't have anything positive to offer you anyway.

I hope this is what you were asking; if not, let me know and I'll try again. -- Essjay · Talk 06:15, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Hey, I saw your reply. I don't know about his article contributions, but honestly, what I saw from his talk page and the archives suggests he's just grumpy in general. The comments he had for you, I thought, were completely out of line. It's entirely inappropriate for any experienced user to make comments to scare, dishearten, or otherwise "run off" any of our new users. I was a new user here two months ago, and if someone had said something like that to me, I would have went right on to the next site. I hope what he's said won't deter you from contributing to the project, and I apologize on behalf of Wikipedia for his unfriendly "advice." -- Essjay · Talk 07:22, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Tutorial

Jeffrey:

I'm not sure which page you mean; if you meant this page, it's called your Talk Page. If you meant the reference desk (where you first posted), it's called the Reference Desk.

There are two things at work here; you should have an orange bar that appears at the top of your screen when a post is made at this page. It will only appear if a post is made on this page. If that isn't working, you may be having problems with your settings.

Second, there is the watchlist (the link in the top corner of every page that says "my watchlist"). If you have a page on your watchlist, an entry will appear on your watchlist whenever that page is edited. However, only the most recent edit will appear; if several edits have occurred, it will only show you the current version of the page. If you click the link that says "(diff)", it will show you the most recent edit at the top of the page, and you can click on other links to see previous changes.

I hope one of the two of these was what you were asking; if not, let me know, and I'll try again. -- Essjay · Talk 04:36, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)

Use of Wikipedia by intelligence services

When all is said and done, a lot more is said than done. Wikipedia is talk. It has its place and its dangers, but use of scarce resources to monitor a bunch of talkers would not be a productive use of intelligence resources. Fred Bauder July 8, 2005 12:47 (UTC)

Really, Jeff, I don't know what to say. My expertise is theology, not government, and I usually leave the government stuff to people who know more about it than I do. Maybe one of the others will have a better handle on the situation. I've always taken at face value that Wikipedia was started innocently by Jimmy Wales. -- Essjay · Talk July 9, 2005 01:17 (UTC)

Short Story

Hi Jeffrey:

An original non-copyright short story? Well, we don't house any original research or non-encyclopedic content at Wikipedia; you could try one of the other projects. Just go to the Main Page and their listed at the bottom. I don't work on any of them (except the occasional contribution in furtherance of my work here) so I really don't know a whole lot about them. Maybe Wikisource or Wikibooks?

I'm glad to hear you're ready to start working on the article. I've moved my pages around, so if you want to work on it outside the article space, try here.

As for your contributions, you can see a list of all the contributions you've made here or by going to the "my contributions" link at the top of the page. Good luck! -- Essjay · Talk 17:03, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Dumbing down etc

Hi, Jeffrey. Interesting remarks from Hegel, thanks for the addition to the talk page. The idea of an intro to philosophy sounds great. The best venue for it, I think, would be Wikimedia's database for teaching courses, since Wikipedia is supposed to be encyclopedic.

Anyway, Hegel seems to have some insights in there that are worth noting, but a mischeivous reader such as myself can point out that his comments only undermine the job of the shoemaker. I'd also follow the path of guys like Sokal and Orwell and venture to say that some academics (like some in all fields) encrypt their work in jargon in order to justify the costs of entering the field by offering the means to decryption (via classes and personal instruction). On the one hand, this keeps the institution alive and well, financially; on the other, it doesn't foster a third culture very well.

Knowledge management? Sounds interesting. Do you use epistemology much in your work? Lucidish 15:28, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just ask about epistemology because I've been wondering (hoping) if the field as it stands today has been doing any theoretically helpful work in regards to issues of truth and knowledge in the real world. IE: in journalism, knowledge management, what have you. It's supposed to be an investigation into knowledge, so one would think that it would have advice to give to folks who make a living out of knowing.

Re: Sokal and linguistic transparency, I'm not sure I follow you. Who is it that you think isn't understanding science and philosophy? Wikipedians, or Sokal? Lucidish 16:25, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tacit knowledge

I fully agree with your comment in Talk:Tacit knowledge. You have not actually made the edit you were talking about, though. I suggest you go ahead and move the paragraph in question to Hayek's page. Rl 07:45, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for voting in my RfA; I promise I'll wield my sacred mop with care. If you ever need me for anything, you know where to find me. Thanks again! -- Essjay · Talk 15:33, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Hello Jeffrey

I was last in Keele about twenty years ago. A dream of education in its true sense and a campus on which I confess to having a lot of fun before the generation gap widened to such a point where I became a sad parody of my former self. Yet, ultimately, we could not get on as the academic standards slipped more rapidly there than at other universities. I am pleased that it survives. And I am no longer in the area. The Midlands are a good place to live in for a while, but I could never really call them home. Welcome to Wiki. I am shortly off to risk an operation so I may not be around for a while but, in the main, this seems not a bad place to drop anchor for a while. -David91 16:57, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved this comment from Jeffrey's userpage. -- Essjay · Talk 18:52, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the good wishes. In September, I will become even more stentorian than I ever imagined possible (assuming that I survive the general anaesthetic, that is). I have no surviving contacts with former academic colleagues (John Sloboda was always very approachable). These days, I find more in common with those few that persist from my National Service. -David91 07:03, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hannah Arendt

I wish you luck working on the Arendt article; I'm sorry to say I won't have time to look at it much at the moment. In response to your comments on my Talk page, I can only say that you seem well-prepared to work on the article -- but please do remember Wikipedia:No original research. Don't present your reading of Arendt here, no matter how interesting it may be, as that would be original scholarship; rather, find secondary sources and biographies, and simply summarize and report their work. And simple language is always better, for pedagogical purposes: most of Wikipedia's readers are not academics. Best of luck! -- Rbellin|Talk 18:20, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! In reply to your post on my talk page, thanks for asking me, but I don't think I'm fit to write an article about her. I have access to a lot of material on or by her, so if you need help to check certain data I might be able to help you out, but I just don't know enough about her myself. I added my email to my contact page, drop me a line via that if you need help, and good luck! Eliot Stearns 10:10, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jeffrey. I am new to Wikipedia. Have you begun on work for Life of the Mind? Mark Joseph 09:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

introductions

hi.

Meet Mark Dingemanse at User talk:Mark Dingemanse#introduction: Jeffrey Newman.

Meet Mustafaa at User talk:Mustafaa#introduction: Jeffrey Newman.

WP:CSB

I am a 'newbie' (though a little resistant to some of WP's in-group jargon) and am delighted to have come across the CSB Project. I came to ask how to put its Open Tasks box on my user page (I'm not entirely happy with it, either, but at least it draws attention to, and demonstrates that I am supportive of, the project.) However I notice you do not have it now on your page! Any comments appreciated!

I have it on my watchlist. I almost never look at my own User page, so that would not do me any good to place it there. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:32, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I see from my own 'talk' page, that we were once previously in contact about the comparative difficulties of Lacan, Foucault, Derrida - I did know that I had seen some interesting edits and comments by you.

Now, therefore, please, a completely different question. How do I 'archive' my 'talk' page, which is getting a bit long? Incidentally, yours is, too - it makes editing and previewing a bit complicated! User:Jeffrey Newman

Cut and paste, make overt links from your user talk to the archive pages. And I recommend watchlisting the archive pages: some people will probably try to leave you messages there, and vandals have been known to strike them. As for the length of my own page: it's not even three weeks worth, I get a lot of traffic, it doesn't make sense to archive things that recent. I suggest that you use the "+" tool rather than the "edit this page" tool to make additions to long talk pages, or edit individual sections. I almost never edit whole long pages. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:32, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Hi

I'm sorry but I don't understand your question. Adam 05:06, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A query:Answer

You wrote:

I am pretty new to Wikipedia, and constantly both learning and astonished. I cannot quite make it all out - like the world, it is probably a mystery.

More specifically - how did you pick up and welcome user:Eliot Stearns? Since he wrote an article on the Wiener Library it seems entirely appropriate but how did it happen? Was that also 'chance.

I am looking for help with developing the article on Hannah Arendt and synchronistically checked to see if there was an article on the library as part of my attempt to make contact with Margaret Canovan who did the introduction to the English edition of Arendt's : "The Human Condition."

I came to your page to find who it was that had welcomed 'eliot_stearns' and find there a reference to WP:CSB which is a major concern of mine! Still of greater interest to me is synchronicity

Sorry to come back to you so late...to answer your question: it wasn't chance, but I consecrate about 10 minutes of my online time each day to RC Patrol, and then it's quite easy: all the new users are highlighted in red (apart from sone strange users, who like to have their signature red), and you can have a look at their contributions; if it seems to be a valuable contribution, and some of their first edits, I use the {{welcome}} template; if its rubbish or vandalism, I use some of the {{test}} templates to warn them off. As to your other query, I can't be of much help there, because it isn't my area of 'expertise' Lectonar 07:06, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

PS: and about the pros and cons concerning pseudonyms: there heve been death threats to some users around, some in relation to contributions to articles about nazis in today USA Lectonar 10:40, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Greetings to you too! Hope to see you around. - Mustafaa 11:16, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your concerns about the CIA

No, the CIA is not supporting Wikipedia in any way.

Of course, if they were, I guess that's exactly what I'd say, huh?

Seriously though, relax a little bit. :-) --Jimbo Wales 06:16, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your concerns about the CIA

No, the CIA is not supporting Wikipedia in any way.

Of course, if they were, I guess that's exactly what I'd say, huh?

Seriously though, relax a little bit. :-) --Jimbo Wales 06:18, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your concerns about the CIA

No, the CIA is not supporting Wikipedia in any way.

Of course, if they were, I guess that's exactly what I'd say, huh?

Seriously though, relax a little bit. :-) --Jimbo Wales 06:20, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Identity Crisis: Jeffrey Newman

I am currently waiting to gain access to these pages. Anyone coming across them who can help - please do so. User:Jeffrey Newman 85.210.255.81 06:44, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Research survey invitation

Greetings Jeffrey Newman-

My name is Randall Livingstone, and I am a doctoral student at the University of Oregon, studying digital media and online community. I am posting to invite you to participate in my research study exploring the work of Wikipedia editors who are members of WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias. The online survey should take 20 to 25 minutes to complete and can be found here:

https://oregon.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_cSHzuwaQovaZ6ss

Your responses will help online communication researchers like me to better understand the collaborations, challenges, and purposeful work of Wikipedia editors like you. In addition, at the end of the survey you will have the opportunity to express your interest in a follow-up online interview with the researcher.

This research project has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Research Committee as well as the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon. For a detailed description of the project, please visit its Meta page. This survey is voluntary, and your confidentiality will be protected. You will have the choice of using your Wikipedia User Name during the research or creating a unique pseudonym. You may skip any question you choose, and you may withdraw at any time. By completing the survey, you are providing consent to participate in the research.

If you have any questions about the study, please contact me via my Talk Page (UOJComm) or via email. My faculty advisor is Dr. Ryan Light. If you have any questions regarding your rights as a research participant, please contact the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Randall Livingstone School of Journalism & Communication University of Oregon UOJComm (talk) 04:06, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]