KQED had a show on about it on Friday. listening to them it seemed to make sense. --evrik ^(talk) 03:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

• It was Forum with Michael Krasny: [1]

--evrik ^(talk) 14:31, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I just saw your comment in the CFD re Ghettos, where you indicated support for Category:Economically disadvantaged communities in the United States. That newly-created category has also been taken to CFD, so you may wish to participate in the new discussion as well. Cgingold (talk) 02:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

You may want to reconsider your vote in light of this. I'm afraid we've been trolled. Viriditas (talk) 09:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Whether or not the person who created the category is guilty of trolling/sock puppetry (even though those practices piss me off) doesn't change the fact that I think this category has merit. Am I missing something? Steve Carlson^Talk 18:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

No, you're not missing anything, but I am. Where is the evidence that these articles should be categorized under that classification? As far as I can tell, there isn't any. I only vote keep on categories that can actually be verified. Viriditas (talk) 04:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I hear that, but I think this category can be easily verified using U.S. Census data, which collects household income figures and reports medians by geography (zip code, I believe). This should give us the information we need to make this categorization, no? Steve Carlson^Talk 17:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

As an example, check this out. This is the 2000 census data for South Alamo, Texas (which tops the Wiki list of poorest places in the U.S.), which shows that 69.2% of the individuals living there are below poverty level. Ouch! So I think this data could be used to populate the category, but we'd need to agree upon the threshold of inclusion - my vote would be for any community with over 50%. Steve Carlson^Talk 19:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Would you consider adding any input to our proposal regarding the DSM-IV. Input is being collected on our talk page. Thanks! Mindsite (talk) 22:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Damn! I thought we finally solved that problem! Oh lord. No matter how often we use the term, "original research", they don't seem to get it, do they?

Anyway, based on information provided on Thoric's user page, I did a search for his real name (Derek Snider) on google. It doesn't look like this guy is any type of serious drug researcher (other than perhaps the type that experiments on himself, possibly?). A linkedin profile indicates he's either a retail manager of a computer shop, a "Senior Software Architect", or a "Contributing Sports Writer"; though I suspect "Senior Software Architect" could be resume-speak for, "I've hacked a few programs on the internet and played around", and "Contributing Sports Writer" could be interpreted as, "sports blogger". Anyway, not to be mean, but I think this guy might've been using some of the drugs he's listing on the chart, probably quite heavily,... Dr. Cash (talk) 03:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I had noticed its return, but was not feeling much like the furore. I am a little concerned about the possibility that it may be published. It's certainly an interesting talking point, but I'd like to see it published somewhere reputable (and referenced), not just published. --Limegreen (talk) 06:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I am concerned about that as well, but I doubt that it is really worthy of being published in a reputable journal, so even if it does make it through publication it would still be a fringe perspective. It would give Thoric a little more credibility to his argument, but I think we could, if we continue to oppose this as a group, we can keep that thing out of the article. Thanks for weighing in! Steve Carlson^Talk 20:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Just because he mentioned that it is about to be "published" doesn't mean anything; for all I know, he could be referring to an upcoming publication of High Times, or some other pop. culture rag, or even putting it in something like a Time Magazine article about the wikipedia page, which also isn't justifying it's reliability. I guess we'll have to keep an eye out to where this thing surfaces. Dr. Cash (talk) 15:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

So now i have to figure out how to add one of these cool leave me a message things on my user talk page. :) ---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oaktownolivia (talk • contribs) 04:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Add the following: {{Usertalkback|icon=lang|you=watched}} to the top of your talk page. Steve Carlson^Talk 04:51, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Oaktownolivia (talk) 04:58, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

so that was a no on the ice-cream??? Oaktownolivia (talk) 05:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

When you nominate an article for deletion, it is considered courteous to notify the creator as well as the main and recent contributors of the article about the nomination for deletion. You don't seem to be doing any of that, which is why I'm reminding you of this point. --AB (talk) 03:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I've been using Twinkle for AfD noms, which I thought was notifying the original creator of the article. But, since the whole AfD process is jacked and totally subjective and doesn't seem to adhere to any policy other than who can make the most noise and find the most insignificant sources, I'm not going to be doing many noms anymore. Sorry if I pissed you off. Steve Carlson^Talk 16:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I've blocked the user for obvious disruption. However, could you provide a list of the other accounts he has had (that you know about)? I'd like to tag the user as a sockpuppet account if it is obviously one. Thanks. Okiefromokla ^questions? 01:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

He's been using anon IP's, this is the only account he created. However, here's the list as I am aware of it:

• 193.146.209.5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 80.191.160.121 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 72.52.220.188 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 72.148.164.72 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 221.120.211.2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 163.139.53.90 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Steve Carlson^Talk 01:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, now that I think of it, someone else identified another account this might be a sock of, and left a warning on his user page, but it was deleted right before the block was instated. Steve Carlson^Talk 01:55, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, ok. I've placed the deleted sockpuppet tag on the user's talk page. I'll just leave the IPs alone for now; if they cause trouble they can be blocked. Thanks. Okiefromokla ^questions? 02:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I've semi-protected your userpage indefinitely. If you ever need it unprotected, feel free to ask me or someone else. Okiefromokla ^questions? 03:01, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Steve Carlson^Talk 03:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry. I'm new at adminning. If he vandalizes again, he's history. And I'll watch the other guy to. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 03:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

"diagram" page Semi-protected for 72 hours. I have all the others' histories opened in tabs and I will keep an eye on them. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 03:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The problem has moved to Wanda Jablonski. Steve Carlson^Talk 04:07, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Observer effect (physics), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Observer effect. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 06:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on MINUIT, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Siwel Ziva (talk) 06:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

In regard to your article. . my sincerest apologies . . --Siwel Ziva (talk) 06:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

No worries, it happens! Steve Carlson^Talk 06:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your recent comment on my talk page. Your points are well-taken. --Law Lord (talk) 12:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Steve, thanks for making the section changes to our Norkom Wikipedia page...it looks good! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.145.2.199 (talk) 15:47, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Polysubstance abuse, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polysubstance abuse. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?

ThanatosComplex —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThanatosComplex (talk • contribs) 04:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I redirected that page to polysubstance dependence rather than simply deleting it. If editors who know the subject well create articles under the wrong name, other people may make the same mistake. If this was for whatever reason the wrong thing to do, please let me know. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 16:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Good call.  :) Steve Carlson^Talk 16:35, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello there, Mr. Carlson. I notice you clim to over 1300 edits to wikipedia, but it states here you've done 2070. Do you mind updating it?--Supersonic Pokémon (contact me) (global contributions and blocks) (local contributions and logs) (Barnstars) 17:32, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I only claim article space edits in that count, as the counter caption says "edits to articles", not talk or user pages. Thanks for noticing! Steve Carlson^Talk 17:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi.. I suggest you ignore that. The user is the sockpuppet of someone who has been indefinitely blocked from WP for abusive use of sockpuppets. (I've kept the talkpages of his identified socks on my watch list). [ roux ] [x] 11:46, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that, and did a little digging of my own - the confirming evidence is pretty convincing. Still, his message to me was quite innocent, so why not reply? Steve Carlson^Talk 20:29, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

CheckUser has confirmed it.. and really was just letting you know so you didn't get sucked into wasting your time. Cheers :) [ roux ] [x] 20:33, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

--Cssiitcic (talk) 20:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

This is just a simple note. I started the "scarab artifact" article some months ago, ... as it was long overdue. I had been meaning to do it before, .... the time was never right. So this is MIchael, from Arizona, the SonoranDesert of SW arizona. I've done Hieroglyphs, and the Amarna letters, and recently did some of the BC timeline stuff in WikiCommons. I just wanted to thank you for editting the Scarab artifact Introduction. But my comment is this: you totally left it as I had stated. I get a little torqued at so many editors, that are so High and Mighty(changing things-and it "Has" to be their way) cause they Know so much. ....(i assume you understand)

Apparently there was an Apache Indian saying: "I am what I do...". It kind of implies that eventually you can get it right, but there is a time for an article, and not....

The scarab artifact is sooooo....important in egyptology, as are the "graffitos" that help fill in all the "missising spaces"- the lacuna (manuscripts). I just started working on the (Sumerian)-disputations, that are mid 3rd millennium BC. There are 7, and they "made my (last six months)". to learn of them. (The disputation article in Wikipedia shows the "evolution of articles"-It is only focussed on Religion and the Middle Ages). (They-(the first Disputation 'Speeches') explain why humans have this desire to Express!...thus Talk pages). the 1st article is: Debate between bird and fish. (only 6 more to go, (by me or somebody)... Any how thanks. And i assume you have been given Barnstars?.... (I got one for the Category:Birds of the Amazon Basin, etc. by User:Jeff Dahl, (whose Egypt-Work I have run into, especially doing the Heiroglyphs in Commons- It's worth examining, since I then continued some of the same searching into "Category:Cuneiform on media" (after "Cat:Hieroglyphs on media").. So thanks for cleaning up the Scarab artifact Intro:....Michael ...

PS..I was wondering-(today) why the Greeks, or nobody else did Disputations before the Middle Ages. They are an "essay"-(maybe poetic, but I think more like a very, very short, Short-Story). I think the Greeks were too uppity, that use of slaves, and commerce of grain had created a 'better-than-thou' society. the Sumerians were carving out their first Mesopotamian- "riverworld".-(no Time for Uppitiness!)--(from the SonoranArizonaDesert, USA)..Mmcannis (talk) 03:41, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate your kind feedback. No, I have never been given a barnstar, but I would consider it a great honor. Steve Carlson^Talk 05:35, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

This review is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps, a project devoted to re-reviewing Good Articles listed before August 26, 2007. The article Psychoactive drug has been re-reviewed and needs to be improved. The article will be placed on hold until issues can be addressed. If an editor does not express interest in addressing these issues within seven days, the article will be delisted. You are being notified due to your listing as one of the top editors (by number of edits) to this article. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 23:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Psychoactive_drug#Thoric.27s_chart. I have just removed the diagram (often added in "See also" sections) from several articles. Should something else be done about this? Thanks. Proofreader77 (talk) 17:34, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I wish there was more we could do, but we really just have to police it. Maybe that "decision" template needs to be moved to the top of the talk page (thought I did that, maybe someone reverted it). Just add it to your watchlist and keep your eye on it! Steve Carlson^Talk 02:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks, for delayed reply. :-) Policing away. Cheers. Proofreader77 ^(interact) 03:05, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

San Francisco Women's History Month Edit-a-Thon! Who should come? You should. Really.
	The San Francisco Women's History Month Edit-a-Thon will be held on Saturday, March 17, 2012 at the the Wikimedia Foundation offices in San Francisco! Participate in editing subjects about women's history and beyond! Workshops will also be hosted. New and experienced editors (of any gender!) are welcome! We look forward to seeing you there!

SarahStierch (talk) 15:13, 3 March 2012 (UTC)