User talk:Pcarbonn

Congratulations, seriously!

Pierre, I stumbled across your alternapedia project, and I wanted to say I like it. I hope people find it useful. Olorinish (talk) 16:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree, alternapedia has some real value in filling a legitimate niche. If your creation is successful it might even reduce the controversy on Wikipedia. I wish you luck in finding a way to present an authentic alternative without being taken over by the truly nutty.--OMCV (talk) 03:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

It would be nice to have a link! Meanwhile, today, there is a ton of reliable source in the news. Media. It's getting interesting. You get to sit back and watch. I'm jealous. --Abd (talk) 02:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to all. Here is the link to Alternapedia.

Heh, I like the format that you used for the cold fusion articles. It makes specific matters much easier to understand. Let's see if you can make it good enough that we start saying ours is worse :) Personally I think that the more competence that wikipedia has, the better.

(Hey, it has already happened with the History of Homeopathy article in Citizendium, compared to Homeopathy#History, with all its shortcomings it at least manages not to leave gaping holes in its coverage, no mention of Quin for example). --Enric Naval (talk) 04:13, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Time Traveler error

Firefox gives me the following error on TimeTraveler:

Error: syntax error
Source File: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_User_scripts/Scripts/TimeTraveller.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript
Line: 292
Source Code:
</source>

Solution?--Ipatrol (talk) 01:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Not sure. Unfortunately, I can't look at it now. Pcarbonn (talk) 11:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Cold Fusion Warning

Cold Fusion, and parts of any other articles that are substantially about cold fusion, are subject to discretionary sanctions. Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working on an affected article if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.

Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.

The link to this decision is Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Abd-William_M._Connolley#Discretionary_sanctions. This is the required warning. If you need counciling on specific steps you can take to improve your editing, please feel free to ask me to a referal to a neutral respected editor who can help you out. Have a nice day! Hipocrite (talk) 20:19, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Did you attempt to change a section title?

You started this section (Nature Magazine finally acknowledges the possibility of low energy nuclear reactions), but a later edit summary suggests you intended to change it. Was the edit summary correct? Is the proposed new title really appropriate? Olorinish (talk) 22:59, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Welcome!

Welcome back, Pcarbonn! I gather the year is up. I started editing Cold fusion within the past year, so I don't think we've crossed paths.

I'm not an administrator, but I have extensive experience editing Wikipedia, especially with trying to help resolve disputes, so if you have any questions about how things are done on Wikipedia or would like any advice, feel free to contact me on my talk page or by email; however, I'm editing less often these days so you might need to wait for a response. All the best, ☺Coppertwig (talk) 19:11, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

discussion of ban extension

See WP:AN#Cold_fusion. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:43, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Community-imposed topic ban

By community consensus documented here, you are now topic-banned indefinitely from all contributions related to "fringe science" topics, including but not limited to Cold Fusion and related pages, their talk pages, as well as related meta-discussions. You may appeal against this ban by mail to the Arbcom's "Ban Appeal Subcommittee". Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:02, 11 January 2010 (UTC)