Talk:Frey effect

Untitled

A fair proportion of this article may be nonsense, added by 203.198.108.159: pleae check out the changes from (history) 12:12, 16 July 2005 203.198.108.159 (→Other Possible Natural Carriers) to (history) 12:10, 18 July 2005 203.198.108.159 (→Other Possible Natural Carriers)

Other Possible Natural Carriers : Muon decay : says: 'This is possibly the founding principle behind the modern long range, worldwide American psychotronic weapon.'

Riiiiiiight...

I don't have the knowledge to sift the genuine stuff (if any) from the invented techno-babble. Any takers?

Other Possible Natural Carriers

Are there any citations for this work? Not for the repetition of the decays, but for the claim that it might lead to neural events? None of the references are cited in this section, nor do the titles seem to be relevant. It looks like nonsense or original research Salsb 11:42, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Antaeus Feldspar engaging in Vandalism in progress or trolling

Following Wiki's procedures, I am initiating the first stage in what I believe to be Vandalism in progress or trolling by Antaeus Feldspar.

I'm getting tired of seeing what appears to be systematic sabotage on this Frey effect entry.

If this situation continue, I will put in a Requests for mediation or possibly IP blocking.

Antaeus Feldspar, please stop. Wiki is a valuable resource to many people, not a BBS.

It is also not a place for original research, which is what your contributions are. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:06, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any references for what you are specifically trying to add? Salsb 11:42, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Antaeus Feldspar and Salsb this is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

FYI, the Three-revert rule is no more then 3 reversions in a 24hr period; so there has been no violation of 3RR as the reversions occured over 3 days. Salsb 12:21, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

Please do not accuse Antaeus and Salsb of vandalism. According to Wikipedia:Vandalism: "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Apparent bad-faith edits that do not make their bad-faith nature inarguably explicit are not considered vandalism at Wikipedia." You may disagree with their edits, but that is something to work out here on the talk page, not by placing a notice that accuses them of vandalism on top of the article itself. Colin M. 14:48, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

203.198.242.116, I would appreciate it, if in the future, you would not steal my discussion posts in other entries and claim them as your own material! After vandalizing http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hikikomori&action=history I asked you to stop and you have lifted my entire request in the hikikomori discussion (with minor link modification) and posted it as your own here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hikikomori --Mdziesinski

Antaeus is saying there is original research in this article. Exactly which content exactly is original research? --AI 02:40, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Luis Walter Alvarez

I've added the cleanup tag to this article becuase of the section on Alvarez. The discussion of Alvarez is tangential to the main point of this article, and really should go into the article on Alvarez himself (which currently has much less information that what is presented on this page), with a short summary or link to be included on this page. For now I've added the cleanup tag to the article; if this section isn't moved and merged in a few days, I will excise it myself and move it to Alvarez' talk page, as it seems to be barely even relevant to this article. Colin M. 14:44, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and removed the text on Alvarez. It's now on the Alvarez talk page. Leaving the cleanup tag on the article because of the concerns voiced above that some of the content here may be pseudoscientific babble. (I agree that this could be the case but haven't yet had time to investigate.) Colin M. 07:24, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Colin M. this is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. (by anon 203.198.242.116, who does not seem to know that only admins can block users)

In the process of article cleanup

I'm currently working on cleaning up this article, more or less from the top down. Please excuse some inconsistencies in the meantime, such as duplicated references. (This notice will be removed in a few days when I consider my cleanups complete.) Colin M. 14:42, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Antaeus suggests[1] that this article be merged into Microwave auditory effect. Is there consensus for a merge? --AI 02:43, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. Other pages with similar names, such as "microwave hearing effect", redirect here. I don't think there's any reason to keep Frey effect and Microwave auditory effect separate, as it implies that there is some sort of distinction between the two that I don't believe actually exists. Colin M. 04:12, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but where should they all redirect to? Frey effect or Microwave auditory effect? Personally I prefer Frey. --AI 05:05, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't see this comment until after I'd already done the merge. I merged to "microwave auditory effect" because that article is older and there is evidence that the Frey effect article was created with the intention of a "fork". I have no strong preference for it to be in one place or another -- and Google hits for the two names are almost equally common -- but decided it was best to merge the two pages now as opposed to later, especially since I intended to spend some time cleaning up the Frey effect article and it seemed to make more sense to merge first so that the final result is hopefully more coherent overall. If there is substantial consensus that the page should be moved to Frey effect later, I am fine with that. Colin M. 09:52, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Frey effect / Microwave auditory effect merge

I've taken the liberty of merging the Frey effect page into the microwave auditory effect page. The microwave auditory effect page has now inherited the cleanup tag, as I believe most of the sections of the Frey effect page needed heavy copy editing and fact checking. I still plan on going through and finishing up this dirty work at some point soon. In the meantime, it's still the case that many references are duplicated. In fact, this has probably gotten worse because of the merge. Sometime in the next week or so I intend to be done with the cleanup and will remove the tag at that point unless someone objects. Colin M. 09:19, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]