User talk:Doctor Dark

What is going on? World Blogs Clogs Elections The Bar (talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic) Welcome to RationalWiki, Doctor Dark! Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing: Read what our articles are intended to be Check out the to-do list See our help page and Wikipedia's formatting cheatsheet If writing a new article, consider writing up a draft And most importantly: Pull up a goat and have some fun!

Welcome to the Dollhouse! ħuman 04:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Where am I?

How do you flush this damned thing? ^{— Unsigned, by: Doctor Dark / talk / contribs} 05:44, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Pull the green lever. Not that lever, the green one!!!! Punky ^{Your mental puke relief} 04:17, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Sysop

Yes, you. Aceⁱ⁹ 02:18, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

What did I do to deserve this? I demand an attorney. Until then I take the fifth.preferably single malt, though a good blend would doDoctor Dark (talk) 03:52, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Citizendium article edits

You might want to check these. As a biologist, I was a bit too horrified by this article (AND IT'S APPROVED) to hold back much. It's written by Larry Sanger. Of course. Aconite (talk) 04:08, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

OMFG... that's just horrid. Aside from the science, there's the writing style that sounds like it's aimed at a precocious fourth grader with all the patronizing prattle about "a sense of wonder" and so on. As for the statement that "this introductory article focuses on biology as a formal science" -- no, it doesn't. I think one can buy slightly older versions of Campbell or other intro textbooks on the web for under $10. Maybe we should take up a collection and get one for Larry. Doctor Dark (talk) 04:21, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

On re-reading the content might not be so bad, but the quality of writing is so poor that it's hard to tell. For example "all present living things descended from past living things" is nearly meaningless. The material is expressed such a wordy and indirect way that it almost makes one think it was written in large part by a philosopher. Doctor Dark (talk) 04:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

It's a bad attempt at a history of biology, with a bit shoved in at the bottom containing random bits of modern research. It's the sort of writing you get from high-schoolers who know a bit about the subject, but don't know enough to pull out the important things, nor do they understand it well enough to explain it. The science of biology is almost entirely absent.

The way to do overviews of a scientific field is basically to list and explain the key organizing concepts. For example, a biology article would (off the top of my head) be about 25% evolution, 25% genetics, 25% taxonomy, and 25% everything else, like developmental biology and population genetics. Physics might start by explaining terms, e.g. NEwtonian mechanics, forces (electromagnetism, gravity, etc), baryons and leptons, and then bring it together with very basic explanations of relativity and quantum mechanics. History of the field - unless you're writing an entire book on the subject - should be an afterthought; Larry Sanger, being an idiot, instead does nothing BUT the history of the field, which he doesn't actually know. Aconite (talk) 05:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Sanger did start the Citizendium Biology article

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Biology/Draft&limit=500&action=history shows he started it in 2005; the "Approved" version's history only goes back to 2006.

The trouble is there's some page moves and copy-paste page moves in there that muddle the history. Aconite (talk) 19:30, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Picture linx

To link to a picture just use an internal link with a colon in front of the "File:...". 21:03, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah, thanks, I see now. Not exactly intuitive. I blame it on the Communists. Doctor Dark (talk) 03:42, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

While I haven't yet given up on CZ, I know it can be frustrating and seem confused from the outside. Your comments, while sometimes critical, usually seem constructive to me, and I wanted to express my appreciation.

Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 01:55, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. Although most Citizens likely do not to believe it, I would be glad to see Citizendium pull itself together and become a success. I have tried to keep criticism constructive and ask that you not hesitate to call me out if you think I've crossed the line. Doctor Dark (talk) 03:40, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

If you'd be willing to be something of a sounding board, I'd appreciate email contact at username hcb at the domain netcases in the top-level domain associated with networks. Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 00:17, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Not meaning to offend, but I'd rather not get entrained into the workings of Citizendium. You're welcome to post your ideas here and I'll respond as time allows. Doctor Dark (talk) 01:31, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

I accept that. This was intended as a way of getting a personal view, but, unfortunately, public posting raises its own set of problems back at CZ. Let me think about anything I can post in public without aggravating situations. Some of the vitriol may reduce with the departure of one individual, but there are still strong acids. Just take this as a compliment that I value your opinion. Who knows -- maybe CZ will find its way. Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 02:44, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Wait...

What? Thunderkatz^Ho! 01:23, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Where? Doctor Dark (talk) 01:29, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Why? Тy^Talk. 02:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

RationalWiki talk:Saloon bar/RationalWiki talk talk:Saloon bar/RationalWiki talk talk talk:Saloon bar? Thunderkatz^Ho! 02:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I saw. Still. WHY? Тy^Talk. 02:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Your work

For demonstrating exemplary goatery in the line of duty, Ty has awarded you a used pre-owned! and slightly stale cookie. Ewwwwwww. Cockroaches ate half of it.

Тy^{Serious Business Guy} 03:07, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Yum! They're always better when you swap out the margarine for rendered goat lard. Doctor Dark (talk) 13:31, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll take your word on that. Тy^{Serious Business Guy} 17:40, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Aye, good work all round! ADK^{...I'll burst your US Navy aircraft carrier!} 17:48, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Hayford is on the hunt... maybe

Enjoy. My response. —Tom Morris (talk) 20:15, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Essay:Vote

I don't think you're supposed to edit another user's essay. Good addition though. -- Nx / talk 05:12, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought since it wasn't in (personal? user? whatever it's called...) space it was open to others for editing. I've undone my changes. Doctor Dark (talk) 05:21, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

vigilant employing dog

Citizendium

You asked: I have assumed that the rising trend toward the end of each year is due to Eduzendium students (who almost never stay around after their assignments are completed). Is there any way to know whether this is in fact the case?

I tried to answer this question:

• A little bit on Eduzendium students and workgroups...

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 18:43, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Very interesting. The answer with regard to the Eduzendium effect seems to be "sort of." Doctor Dark (talk) 02:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Fat graceful ham

Did you use a random sentence generator for that or did you write it yourself? If it's the latter... that's a lot of work. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 04:52, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

What I originally planned was to mash up random bits of Abd's own text, but I'm too lazy (and I've got a pile of papers in front of me that I really should be working on) so I clicked at http://randomtextgenerator.com/ and touched up the results a bit. In the end I thought better of it. I haven't had that much to do with Abd but from my limited contact the fellow seems to be what the young people call an "attention whore." So any response, even mocking his verbosity, only encourages him by feeding his craving for attention. Doctor Dark (talk) 05:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

For the record, I thought it was funny. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 05:12, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

In that case I'll put it back. Officially "closed," but what the hell. Doctor Dark (talk) 13:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I came here to compliment you on it too - David Gerard (talk) 23:13, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the block

The three second block managed to prevent me from making a further tit of myself. By the end of it, I had fully sobered up. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:07, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

here