Talk:Iridology/Archive 2

message: I created our first archive (the page was too long): 
Talk:Iridology/archive1 (3 Apr 2003 - 22 Jan 2004)
This page: (22 Jan 2004 - 25 Jan 2004)
----
"There is neither monopoly nor trademark for the use of terms such as iridonomy for iridology like astronomy vs. astrology. However, there is a trademark for the wider, all encompassing, probably more correct umbrella term iridial studies".
What do you mean by this phrase ? theresa knott 16:23, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you've done a pretty good job. I'd like to see more detailed evidence of debunking - I may well reasearch this topic and some myself. I think the tone is reasonable. But what i particulaly like is that the page "reads" well, is written in good english, with a mininmum of jargon and appropriate level of wikification of links. Irismaster if you edit this page please bear these points in mind. Most people reading this article are likely to be laypersons who do not understand the jargon. I am well educated, I have an honors degree in physics from UCL yet I can not follow most of what you are saying because your prose isn't in plain english. Please write for your readers. 
As for the medical disclaimer, It's not necessary. A disclaimer link was recently added to  the bottom of all wikipedia pages so that we do not have to add individual disclaimers like this. theresa knott 11:34, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)

text: David did a great job on the article when wikipedia went down. :)  About the disclaimer, I didn't realise, thanks for explaining.  And if there's a bigger debunking section there should perhaps be a bigger section explaining the theories behing iridology, or common trends in irirdology or something like that (for balance).  And I second everything you said about plain English  Fabiform 15:25, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I would like to see a proper  in depth description of exactly what iridologists do.  theresa knott 16:26, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)

message: My dear friend,
I understand your pains. Perhaps you also understand other pains too: The pain of seeing ignorance posing as qualité maitresse , while it is arrogantly displayed, and promoted to the status of master censor to determine the destiny of value. These are only growing pains, my dear friend and Wiki fellw peer editor . It is enough for you not to mix add your own choice of qualifying epithete work with good work (the way babies do before they are trained with the potty), it is enough for you to know what you are talking about, and to try hard to avoid grotesque mistakes and I will train you no more. It's really up to you ! In his quest for quality, Voltaire went so far as to write "écrasez l'infâme ". Si parva licet componere...  I certainly do not crush you! I only very, very, carefully train you, baby ! The gentle, patient, compassionate way! Using my time and my energy which could be better used in more Wiki articles ! So, if anything, you should be honored ! If you feel honored as you should, Wiki will grow in the process, and you will also grow in knowledge, compassion and experience. And who knows? Maybe, one day you'll come back here on this iridology talk page to thank me for my patience : ) If you know less flooding an "approach" to incompetence, please say so! I understand it's hard to be incompetent, and to want to play competent symmultaneously. But ignorance is no excuse. And there are no substitutes and workarounds, even in your culture, for real knowledge. Real knowledge, acquired the hard way. Per aspera ad astra  ! Ad augusta per angusta  ! Look what these mean and write back, please! In the mean time, start by displaying a better behavior yourself ! Like doing some real research about what you write, or only cut. Like not cutting what you haven't read first. Like disserting, editing and recommending less and simply reading and writing more.
Sincerely, 81.49.213.23 12:28, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: I understand your pains