User talk:Thoric/archive4

Drug Chart

I'm not quite sure what you are driving at with the comment you placed on my talk page, but my point is that featured pictures need to be worthy as stand-alone images, and cannot rely on article text to support them. While this image may do a superb job of supporting its article, it is not capable of standing alone and is therefore not an appropriate candidate for Featured Picture. No hard feelings, I hope. D e nni ☯ 01:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to write a comment too, but all I wanted to say is in the above. --Janke | Talk 21:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that's what I get for not answering comments on my own page as well as the users page. My point is (for anyone who reads here) is that you weren't voting on the empty chart background graphic image:BlankDrugChart.png, but instead for the whole chart itself. I've made a graphic which includes all the text to help convey this to those who don't seem to understand what I mean -- image:Drugchart.png. I am now asking those who voted oppose specifically to the blank chart graphic, to reconsider their vote, and to vote upon the non-blank chart instead. I think you will agree that the non-blank chart does stand on its own, even though this is not a requirement according to the guidelines. --Thoric 21:21, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that doesn't change my opinion. In addition that a FP should add to an article (which I say it does), it should be good (preferably "striking") as an image, too. However good the chart is in context, I don't find it graphically very "striking". PS: I really think we shouldn't take FPC discussions to personal talk pages. --Janke | Talk 21:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC) PPS: Both versions (w/o and with text) were up when I voted.[reply]

Nice work

Like I've said over in Talk:Psychoactive_drug, your chart looks pretty accurate to me. I just wanted to say that I think you've done an impressive job, in case that hadn't come across in my previous posts. Semiconscious (talk · home) 20:15, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Smaug/ResortMUD

I had many adventures ( and happy times ) in a ResortMUD based MUD (SDF MUD). I wanted to write stories about my adventures in the MUD. I was wondering if it was ok for me to use the names Darkhaven etc. in the stories. You can have a look at two of them @ my blog .

Conspiracy theorist

I'd like to apologize for my intemperate remarks. It was a statement born of frustration and irony, but not entirely appropriate in context. --DocJohnny 05:30, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Took me a while to track down what that was in reference to... My statement was directed towards a user who was attacking (and continuously removing) a chart I composed for the psychoactive drug article, and I had felt it necessary to point out his ongoings in the talk pages of other articles he had been attacking. I guess you could say that my statement was also born of frustration, and not entirely appropriate in context ;) I have nothing against doctors. However I do not trust the intentions of the pharmaceutical industry to always be in the best interest of the patients as compared to the shareholders, and believe that much of their investor driven agenda trickles down in propaganda form to doctors. Cui bono ;) --Thoric 00:54, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. And I agree that pharmaceutical companies are primarily beholden to their stockholders. And certainly I take all their claims with a grain of salt until I review the research myself. I am especially wary of off-label uses, after the neurontin debacle in 2003. I just don't believe that a massive cabal exists to deceive the consumer any more than in any other business that advertises. Again, my rant was not appropriate. It was born out of frustration that in my personal experience, vociferous critics of conventional medicine inevitably return to conventional medicine when actually ill. This irony sometimes beats me about the head and shoulders leaving black and blue marks, causing disgorgement of rants such as the one mentioned. --DocJohnny 04:24, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FP nom

of course i'll support, i love that chart- thanks for the heads-up. not quite sure why everyone seems to think that it's original research. --Heah ^talk 00:07, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

online creation

Thanks for expanding the (please add information here) I left. Atari2600tim 21:24, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I figured out who it was a long time ago; if this wasn't a public page then I'd tell you the #1 thing that makes it obvious that it's him, but since it's public I won't write it here since it'll just encourage him to change his habits. I noticed that he's picked up on every thing that I introduce as a possibility whether it's a real or planted possiblity, and introduced it as fact :P He seems to think that if I say that something depends on X and I personally don't remember X, then X has never been disproven. I know the article's extremely inaccurate now, but there may or may not be small parts to keep, I just haven't gone through it lately since there've been a couple dozen edits in a row (and I don't want to TOTALLY throw it away if there's even one good thing added). I'm just focusing on the images for now since it's not time-consuming. If you have an opinion one way or the other about deleting the new images then I'd suggest adding a vote on the image deletion page so that they might actually do it (it seems hard to actually have images deleted unless you can get one-on-one time with an admin, which I haven't bothered to do). Atari2600tim 18:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2006_January_22.Atari2600tim 18:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm apparently your puppet

Now that it's been discovered that me and firestorm are both your sock puppets, I think {{user Puppet Master}} on your user page would be appropriate, and {{user Sock Puppet|Thoric}} on ours. However, we can never really be sure which is the original one. Are we sock puppets of yours, and you're a sock puppet of some other persona who's contributed even longer? If so, should I put that you're my puppet master, or that your puppet master is my indirect puppet master? Maybe there's a circular chain among the three of us?

Psychonaut

i have some serious issues with the very well written otherwise Psychonaut page, which i have listed briefly in the psychonaut disambiguation talk page.

I also have more minor issues with the Entheogenics page...

I would very much appreciate (esp as a total newbie) your sense of how to deal with this...Part of me just wants to move the current page to a neologism location; PsychoKnot; A wannabe psychonaut, one who uses shamanism as an excuse to do drugs.

By the way, if the above sock puppet situation is true, i keep thinking, whats so wrong with a good sock puppet? I used like two dozen of them on bnet; (but hey, that was always an inherantly pov site, and when you are confronting a mob, it helps to inflate your numbers... lol)

Prometheuspan 00:14, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Prometheuspan 19:00, 6 February 2006 (UTC) Well, I have thought about it, and there are two main solutions that I see. The first is to try to edify the article that allready exists. I think this would do well for the "Mergist" Wikipedia agenda, considering that the other option i see is to move it to "Entheogenic Psychonaut."[reply]

It has been all weekend, why is it that nobody ever answers anybody in wikimedia? I mean, so far, I have been bopping around for two weeks now and not as much as one response to anything other than my WikiCity proposal. Are you all sleeping? Or Partying? Wuz up?

Nice Graphic

I think thats a great graphic. As long as you put it up with appropriate disclaimer, i think its fine. Prometheuspan 00:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

" to be a better way to do this. We need a generic solution."

Sure, well, this is the rub. Its a useful schema, just barely, but its the old standard.

Better ways of classifying Drugs/Entheogens exist, but they are either vastly more complicated or admittedly esoteric.

A few good examples;

1. Organization by biochemistry
2. Organization by brain hemisphere activity
3. Organization by "Chakra"

Generic Solutions may tend to be dumbed down; your mileage may vary. That graphic is the best map of that Schema I have personally ever seen, you might as well run with it, and move on to the other more accurate Classification Schema.

Prometheuspan 18:55, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eggster violating 3RR

I'm going to stay within WP:3RR, and have made a report regarding NiMUD at the admin's notice board. If you'd like to correct NiMUD some tonight then feel free to do so. If he uses some sock puppets to delete your corrections then feel free to add comments onto my notice pointing out the sock puppets if you'd like as well... if lucky, an admin will deal with it soon enough that it won't be a problem though. If they can see that he's reverted my stuff 3 times and your stuff 3 times then it'll obviously make their decision about blocking a bit easier though. --Atari2600tim 01:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment, I'm concerned about the Online Creation article falsely claiming that it's public domain, while public domain has a specific legal meaning that no Diku derivative can ever meet. --Atari2600tim 01:36, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drug chart

I just bumped into your drug chart and came here to congratulate you to your awesome work, only to see that (of course) many others had done so before. To pour some water into the wine, the only drawback is that we don't have an easy way to change charts like this. Maybe you could, for starters, add a recommendation for an editor to Image:BlankDrugChart.png? (assuming you use something better than a text editor to position the text elements) Algae 10:44, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I am even more impressed now. What an amazing effort. And yet, there has to be a better way to do this. We need a generic solution. Ah well, there are so many programmers on WP, one of us is bound to write something, sooner or later ;-). Algae 20:18, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Canada

Hi there! I'd like to invite you to explore Wikimedia Canada, and create a list of people interested in forming a local chapter for our nation. A local chapter will help promote and improve the organization, within our great nation. We'd also like to encourage everyone to suggest projects for our national chapter to participate in. Hope to see you there!--DarkEvil 15:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

stuff . . .

hi thoric, i just sent you an email and figured i'd give you a heads up as i have no idea how often you check it. --Heah ^talk 07:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drug Chart Parody

Hello! I hail from Uncyclopedia and I was perusing Wikipedia when I came across your drug chart. It sparked in me a great number of ideas for a parody that could be made. It is clearly apparent that you have put a lot of work into this, and so while we at Uncyc often just steal images, I figured I would ask first. Would it be alright if I sporked your image (and chart) for a parody series of articles? And would you be interested in helping? Uncyclopedia is great for relieving stress. =]

Nice job on the chart, by the way! --Keitei 18:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Psychedelic experience

have you seen the tags? --He:ah? 18:32, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another diagram

This is just a heads up, a Venn diagram has appeared at Amino acid#Hydrophilic and hydrophobic amino acids - if you're interested in another diagram project, here's one for you. If not, don't worry about it. I left a note on the author's talk page (User talk:Dmb000006#amino acids image) letting him know that he might want to take a look at your drug diagram if he wanted to improve his amino acid diagram. -- stillnotelf has a talk page 19:26, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marijuana Wiki

Hi there,

I see that you are a pro-Cannabis Wikipedian so I hope this will be of some interest to you.

I've started a Marijuana wiki (aka The Sticky Wiki) which I think you might be interested in. I'm hoping you can help me get started with this project. Whereas lots of articles about weed get speedy-deleted on Wikipedia, they would be totally cool over at MarijuanaWiki. But really I want the site to be more of a marijuana community than merely an encyclopedia.

To give you an example, I want to have city guides about where to score, find pot-friendly cafes, marijuana events, and what represents a good price in that city. Etc. (You can check out the featured article: "Toronto" to see what I mean). Of course, I want to see articles about the negative health effects and the drug laws in each of the countries. I also want to have grow diaries and marijuana blogs. All in all, basically more communal than encyclopedic.

I am in need of admins/moderators, and people experienced with MediaWiki to help build policy, categories, and templates, etc. If you'd be interested in helping me with this project, the URL is MarijuanaWiki

Thanks for your time and consideration. Hope to see you there!

-- nsandwich 00:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neo Drug Chart

Yup, it looks like you've put EVEN MORE work into it...the new one is somewhat better.

Comments I would make on the chart itself:

The spacings on Sympathomimetic Amines and Psychomotor Stimulants off just the tiniest bit; they break their defined shapes.
Methadone? Should it be shoehorned in?
Promoting Antipsychotics to full circlehood was a good choice!
If cannabis is separate from THC, should tobacco be included as a companion to nicotine? (There's other stuff like Harmala alkaloids)
You might want to make the background outside the circles transparent so it doesn't have a white box around it.
Something seems odd with the Antipsychotic coloring..the same pink is used both in this "this part only" of the diagram, and the middle section. The center should be white, and the cannabis/THC section should get a different color...?

Meta-commentary:

Why not move it to User:Thoric/newchart instead of where it is...?

I'll take another look at it later. I'm only making image commentary, I trust you to know the drug details better than I do. Keep up the incredible work! -- stillnotelf is invisible 00:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

edit on psychedelics.

if the paragraph in question does not in fact speak of psychedelics, then please elaborate on the exact group that youre talking about instead of just saying 'Certain psychoactive drugs', because it was my understanding that one should give a thorough, non-confusing instruction, whereas your edit simply points out to people that some group of psychoactive drugs are different than one another. By the way, no need to be a sarcastic ass in your response as you previously were.--Neur0X 00:57, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has sent for the cabal!

A Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal request in which you are a participant has had an update! Please see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-07-09 Pharmacology Templates for more information and discussion. Stifle (talk) 10:27, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cat changes . . .

[1], [2], [3], and etc. i don't like it at all. i've left a note for Urod (talk • contribs) at their talk page. thoughts? --he ah 07:56, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]