Hello Robert P. O'Shea and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.
Here are some tips to help you get started:
To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
You are welcome. Please accept my deepest condolences and please pass them onto your grandmother. Please also feel free to ask your grandmother to send me an e-mail so I can communicate with her directly (or send one yourself). I post on Wikipedia using my real name.
Thank you for your kind words and good wishes. I fear that Wikipedia will be the end of my academic career. Note that it has taken me this long to reply! Robert P. O'Shea 08:57, 2005 Mar 2 (UTC)
Hi Robert - I think you might be one of the best-placed people in Wikipedia to expand this stub article: Christopher Tyler. Grutness|hello? 08:08, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
No? well how about this one: McCullough_effect! At the moment it's a pitiful substub of about a dozen words. Grutness|hello? 12:50, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Dear James,
OK. I'm finally getting the hang of Wikipedia's talk. I did indeed tinker with the McCollough-effect entry. I hope you like it. Robert P. O'Shea 08:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I have just reverted your cut-n-paste move of Loess to loess soil of Sept. 16. Please in the future do not do such a cut-n-paste move, rather use the move button at the page top. Moving a page correctly keeps the page history attached to the page - whereas a cut-n-paste move detaches the page history. This is an important concern for Wikipedia. Also when and if you make page moves, please check and make sure all pages linking to the previous page are correctly linke without any double-redirects to mess things up. Thanks, Vsmith02:09, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:ZEKI photo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.
I'm looking for some information about the image processing the retina does, and I think you might be able to help. The articles on Ganglion cell, Amacrine cell, Bipolar cell, etc. are in some cases extensive, but none of them really explain how these connect to each other to do things, or even really what those things are. In Receptive field, it claims the ganglion cells (which I belive are the only ones that send anything on to the brain) that are involved in image processing either have very simple center-surround fields, or even simpler center-only fields, but then what's the point of the horizontal cells? Do the bipolar cells do nothing but reverse the polarity of some inputs and leave others alone? Why not just have something in the ganglion cells take care of that?
Any assistance is appreciated. In case it helps, I'm looking at this from the perspective of a computer programmer, so it's more the processing of information than the chemistry and physiology that I'm interested in. 70.242.4.145Black Carrot00:01, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Robert
I see that you have been contributing to psychology articles on Wikipedia.
Just to let you know that we are working on an academic psychology wiki for our professional community and their users.
This can be found at:
[1]
We would really welcome your input and ask you to join us.
We already have over 7000 pages up.
Orientation, help and community portal pages are available off of this link.
Please pass the good news onto anyone you feel would be interested.
Just read your list of articles worked on your obviously our kind of man!!!.
Lifeartist15:46, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the barnstar for Tetris effect. That was my first star. And congratulations on becoming an administrator.
By the way, I still don't get how talk is supposed to work. I keep thinking it should be easy, like e-mail, but it seems very hard. I guess I don't have the correct mental model of it. Indeed, I'm not sure if I am doing it correctly even now. Robert P. O'Shea05:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're doing it right! Different people do it differently, but for the most part if someone posts a message on your talk page, you respond by going and replying on their talk page. Some people post replies on their own talk pages so that the thread is easier for an individual to follow (as that way, all the posts are in one place rather than being divided onto two different talk pages). That's how that works. The way that threads work is thus: when you respond to a message, indent your message so that you're one level of indentation further in than the person you're replying to. If you're replying to a message that has already been replied to, the reply underneath that thread (time moves downwards). Here's an example:
Yes it does. Thanks. I hope you won't think I am pestering you if I ask another question: If I reply on my own talk page (and I agree that doing so makes it easier to see a thread), how do you know when I've replied to you? Robert P. O'Shea00:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, answering questions is what I'm here for :). Well, I won't, unless 1) I'm watching your page, not always a good bet to make, or 2), you let me know you've replied by either leaving a note saying so or copying your reply onto my talk page (which is what you did in your last post). The second or third options are the better ideas, IMHO. Some people either don't want to take the time to let you know or figure that if you care about the thread you'll be watching their page (kinda snobby if you ask me, I don't like to clog up my watchlist with userpages, but I have to because of that), so it's always a good idea to watch other user's talk pages until you know how they go about replying. I'd highly recommend the second method (i.e., posting a note on their talk page), as it only takes a minute and makes everything easier for everybody.
By the way, on Wikipedia at least, it's not "standard" (whatever that means) to use arrows (>) to show threading, like you would in e-mails. Actually, quoting someone at all isn't common: it's assumed that the person you're responding to knows what they've said, and if they've forgotten, they'll just follow the thread back up and find what you're referring to. Quoting uses up indentation space, and rarely is necessary. If you have to quote someone, post what they've said in italics and indent you response under that. For example, let's say I wanted to quote Person A in our above example, but threading wouldn't be appropriate for whatever the reason. I'd respond as such:
Blah. Person A (timestamp)
Reponse. ~~~~
Make sense? This issue doesn't come up to much, as threading works fairly well as long as people post chronologically and indent properly. Remember that general comments that aren't specific to an individual often work best un-indented so that there's no confusion about whether or not you're responding to a specific person. You'll get the hang of when to indent and how, it just takes a bit of getting used to.
Oh, and a last comment (it took me awhile to figure this out): in a really long thread, when there's too many indents and you run out of room, you start over again with a little note. Here's how that's generally handled:
Blah.
Response.
Response.
Response.
Response.
Response.
Response.
Response.
Response.
Response.
Response.
Response.
Response.
Response.
(Moving over to the left) Response.
Response.
Response.
The "moving over to the left" post should be treated just like it was indented again under the previous post for all chronological purposes. Does that help? Hopefully that rather long post wasn't too confusing. Let me know, and remember that I'm always here if you need me later. Cheers, Snoutwood(talk)06:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The internet poll you quoted now reflects that only 3% of females experience this -- so the spermazoa reference of "majority of females" is inaccurate. Not sure an internet poll is a reliable means to query, or one worth quoting.... Regardless, I've found very few women who know what 'pee shivers' are and even fewer who've experienced them...not that my experiences are any more valid or worthy of a reference...:)
thx.
>The internet poll you quoted now reflects that only 3% of females experience this
This is to misunderstand the poll. The 3% shown in the poll represent 3% of the total number of reponders to the poll. In fact, the total percentage of reponders identifying their sex as female is 5% (or, currently, more than 1200 females). 3% of 5% is a majority, currently about 59% when you do the calculations.
>Not sure an internet poll is a reliable means to query, or one worth quoting
It's all I am aware of in this under-researched topic.
Thanks for letting me know, although it was all over by the time I saw your message. You might like to see my reply at [[2]]. 04:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, hi, I just noticed your comment on my talk page; sorry, I haven't been using Wikipedia much since I began my graduate studies in neuroscience. Because of that same reason, I unfortunately don't have much to improve the article either ;) --Heida Maria04:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
yes, that looks a lot better. As you'll be aware the AfD was a while ago, but if it were to be re-held my recommendation would definitely be a strong keep now. Grutness...wha?00:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have just created a disambiguation page, to which you have added an external link to a non-notable subject i.e. no WP article (which would fail WP:EL). Before you moved the song there were a hundred-odd articles all linking correctly. Would you consider either a) correcting all the articles back so they point to the correct article, or alternatively, b) rolling back the creation of the disambiguation page. Many thanks. --Richhoncho (talk) 19:32, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable software written as a student project. Website down. No content in google. No releases in 7 years. Tagged for notability since Feb 2009. No references.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ogle DVD Player until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:55, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grating, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ian P. Howard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eye movements (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Leipzig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Micropsia, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Convergence and Accommodation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Efference copy may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
reviewed article in [[Scholarpedia]] on Corollary Discharge In Primate Vision by Robert H. Wurtz]]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gustav Adolf Wohlgemuth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William McDougall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Instrument myopia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Accommodation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I moved the article to your userspace at User:Robert P. O'Shea/Neurotree and you can work on it there. It's a little light to be in the mainspace and normally we don't restore A7'd articles, but you've been editing here for a while and should know the basics for websites and the like. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)10:10, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
An article that you have been involved in editing, Wagon-wheel effect, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. 128.211.168.1 (talk) 00:09, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Binocular vision may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
of sight, relative to each other ([[vergence]]), and those lines relative to a particular object ([[gaze angle]]] to be determined from the images in the two eyes.<ref>Longuet-Higgins, H. C. (1982). The role of
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Valentino Braitenberg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greater German Reich. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Valentino Braitenberg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I just saw your edit to watercolor illution, in which you have added yourself to the article, and included a bare link to another enclyclopedia in the leading section (Haven't looked at it thoroughly, though). I'm not very familiar with English Wikipedia's policy (I work mainly in zh), but I doubt these edits are acceptable. It does not matter whether you have indeed discoved it; adding yourself in there is still a major conflict of interest. You might want to read the policies and guidelines and then double check these edits, or have someone check it for you. --Kovl (talk) (Please ping me when replying) 05:21, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Myopia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reciprocal. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Timeline of psychology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mood. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, Robert P. O'Shea. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Robert P. O'Shea. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Window, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Latch. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, Robert P. O'Shea. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Erich Schröger, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DAAD (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
Hi. I reverted you. Normally, I would just hand out a template for your poor editing but I wanted to let you know in a nicer way what the issue is. One, yes I've heard Anne Treisman is dead. We need a source for that claim per WP:V. In fact, all the other content you added needs citations. Finally, you may not remove a maintenance template without providing some sort of reason if you're not going to improve the article. Please tell your fellow academics that the rules still apply. Chris Troutman (talk)05:50, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings! I have been combing through stale userspace drafts, and chanced upon yours at User:Robert P. O'Shea/Neurotree. I compared it to the existing article on the subject and deemed it to contain no additional content of value, so I redirected it to that article. You are free to undo this revision if you like, although if you do, I would request that you remove {{Userspace draft}} and add __NOINDEX__ unless you have any intention of reviving that draft. Thanks! —Compassionate727(T·C)19:28, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Robert P. O'Shea. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Grating, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
Thanks for creating H. Carl Haywood! I edit here too, under the username Path slopu and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-
Please try to fix the issues mentioned in the article. Regards
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Path slopu}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Thanks! I've added links from two other pages. I've added some categories (although I'd appreciate some input from an editor skilled in categories). As for citations, I'll have to leave that to others more skilled in Haywood's life and research than I am.
I should emphasise that I have no conflict of interest with Haywood. When a colleague mentioned him as a notable person who contributed to Dynamic_assessment, I searched for him. The only Wikipedia page I found is the Indonesian Wikipedia. I thought: "That's puzzling", so I took time away from my real job to translate and find citations for the article.Robert P. O'Shea (talk) 14:18, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Cahk (talk) 09:51, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello Robert! I was recently copyediting this page and noticed you are both a vision specialist and its top author. Would you please clarify the first parenthetical statement in this part, so that I ensure an accurate expansion: A sensory space can be the space surrounding an animal, such as an area of auditory space that is fixed in a reference system based on the ears but that moves with the animal as it moves (the space inside the ears), or in a fixed location in space that is largely independent of the animal's location (place cells).? Assem Khidhr (talk) 03:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Robert - I've just been adding some categories to the Glenn A. Fry article and was surprised when I looked at the history to see who it was who'd most recently been editing it! I was actually thinking about you earlier this evening - it's a lovely moonlit night here in Dunedin, and the full moon was making the sky at the horizon much lighter than at the zenith (presumably due to backscatter and/or thew thickness of the atmosphere with respect to the observer at those points), and I was wondering whether there was a particular name for the phenomenon. I thought if anyone knew, you would. Hope things are well with you and your family! James Dignan, a.k.a. Grutness...wha?13:27, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dear James, That e-address did not work. If you want my response, please drop a line to my current gmail address from your preferred e-address and I will I send it to you. (This will require some searching skills, but I am sure you are up to it.)Robert P. O'Shea (talk) 10:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Robert P. O'Shea. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I still use a slingshot address but it's a bit unpredictable (and it may not be the one I used to have), but I've sent a more reliable one. Grutness...wha?02:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
First, the singular they now could mean that the person referred to is of non-binary gender, creating ambiguity. I hope you agree that clarity is better than ambiguity in Wikipedia articles. For example, it's clear to rewrite a sentence in the plural; the plural they specifies that the people referred to contain a mix of genders or that gender is unimportant.
Second, your using a double negative in "Singular they is not grammatically incorrect" demonstrates that the issue is not settled. For example, one of the authorities cited in Singular they is the seventh edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. Elsewhere in the book than the chosen parts, its editors say that other methods, such as pluralization, could be used to avoid using the singular they. These editors conceded that, although writers need to be kind to the minority of readers who are of non-binary gender, writers also need to be kind to the (possibly larger) minority (perhaps even a majority) of readers who still consider the singular they a grammatical error in formal writing.
Third, your using reversion caught up other copyediting changes I made. Are you saying every change I made the text worse?
Fourth, although it is your opinion that my changed text "is not an improvement", I beg to differ. What's your authority that your opinion is better than mine? I realize that if the original text has been there for some time, it benefits from the mere-exposure effect. I did not get that benefit because I was reading the sentences I changed for the first time. Other readers may be in the same boat. Can I suggest that if my changes are really no worse than the originals, you reinstate them and we will see if they stand the test if time? Robert P. O'Shea (talk) 09:28, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi Robert. I wanted to alert you to my intent to substantially edit the page on instrument myopia. The concept is not readily linked to ophthalmology. The term microscope myopia is obscure and I plan on deleting it. It is also neither a form of myopia nor an eye disease but rather a normal user response to viewing with an optical instrument. Your use of relaxed accommodation referring to distant vision is not correct. Your implication that awareness of distance with a microscope leads to instrument myopia is not supported. Finally, there is some history to the concept and I can provide several sources.KM_from_LQ 14:23, 15 June 2023 (UTC) KM_from_LQ 23:54, 14 June 2023 (UTC) KM_from_LQ 15:48, 15 June 2023 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lqdem (talk • contribs)
Dear Lqdem, Thank you for letting me know. And thank you for pointing to your real name. I had a look at your changes; they all seem quite reasonable. I do not know if I added "microscope myopia". Google's ngram viewer did not find a single instance of it. The only thing I did not like is your use of the singular they. I will see what I can do to make the observer gender neutral without offending people who care about prescriptive grammar.Robert P. O'Shea (talk) 05:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I had a poke around the instances of "instrument myopia" from Google's ngram viewer. There are several earlier than 1970, although I have not been able to track down any original sources. One that might be promising is this:
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dudhhr was:
This is not the correct place to request new redirects. Please follow the instructions at Article wizard/Redirects. Thank you.
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.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kurt-Koffka Medal and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, Robert P. O'Shea!
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! – dudhhrtalkcontribssheher16:31, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dudhhr was:
This is not the correct place to request new redirects. Please follow the instructions at Article wizard/Redirects. Thank you.
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.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kurt Koffka Award and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Robert P. O'Shea. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kurt-Koffka Medal, 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.
Hello, Robert P. O'Shea. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kurt Koffka Award, 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.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
08:08, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
12:50, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Efference copy may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
