User talk:Xpaulk

Welcome new user

Hello, Xpaulk, I see you've made a several edits to the encyclopaedia since August 2010. You are most welcome. Apologies for you not being welcomed sooner but here's a standard welcome box with lots of useful links. I hope you get pleasure from editing and making Wikipedia an even better resource for the community. If you have any questions about the project don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page here User_talk:Lumos3.

Happy editing,

Lumos3 (talk) 10:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC) , Wikipedia Welcoming Committee.[reply]

Hello, Xpaulk! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking

if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Lumos3 (talk) 10:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content
Miscellaneous
User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Astrology comments

Hi, welcome. I thought your comments were spot on about the fact/opinion distinction and the satanic example was particularly good. There's continual debate about how to present these subjects. I have found User:Ludwigs2 to also be an especially good advocate for keeping the fact/opinion split clear. And if you're really brave, you can check out Chiropractic, where reasonable people go to run into rough walls over and over. Cheers, Ocaasi (talk) 03:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saw it

It couldn't last long, but I wet myself when I read about Dawkins' change of heart about astrology. Alas, others didn't see the humour in it. Regards Peter S Strempel | Talk 13:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Living Astrologers

I am writing directly as due to limited time, I can only focus on one issue at a time. However, I wanted to share some thoughts on the living astrologers rather than open up the debate or bring in extra detail at this stage.

I believe that Liz Greene, Stephen Arroyo and Richard Tarnas are the only living astrologers on the page right now. Besides her seminal work on Saturn, Liz's greatest contribution IMO is as the first astrologer to actually apply Jung's vision to astrology and the founding of the CPA. I have a quote from Nick Campion in his introduction to Liz at the Conference on the Alchemical Sky (2005) (Astro Logos CD) [Liz Greene & James Hillman] where he says "Liz Greene has made the most creative and innovative contribution to western astrology in recent times." There was also an article in the Observer (UK) newspaper describing her as the Astrologer's astrologer, but I will have to trawl through old cuttings to find it.

I think that Rob Hand is possibly the most outstanding omission of the living astrologers for his work as an author, pioneer of astrological software and as the figurehead behind Project Hindsight. Rob has won so many awards and held so many posts such as Chairman of NCGR and lifetime Patron of the Astrological Faculty, that I don't think there should be any doubt about his inclusion. If someone else does not include him, I hope to do so over the coming months.

Lastly, I am sorry I missed the Dawkins April Fool - I heard Princeton did the reverse by offering a course in astrology! It was just what the page needs to lighten it up. ;) Robert Currey talk 19:16, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ophiuchus spam in the astrology pages because of Parke Kunkle's popular 2011-revelation.

Hi Xpaulk, I understand that you're busy fighting Ophiuchus spam in Wikipedia's astrology articles. However Ophiuchus belongs to Table of dates, since it's a comparison of different kind of astrology and astronomy. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 14:38, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]