2010
Hi, I added some additional comments at continuum (theory) as per your request. If you are familiar with Peirce's work in the area, it would be interesting to elaborate in that direction, as well. Tkuvho (talk) 09:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you very much! Unfortunately, as I said, I don't have the capacity to go into this at the moment. Best, --Morton Shumway (talk) 17:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Hi Morton Shumway. I replied on the Perception discussion page. Alan347 (talk) 12:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your encouragment. Alan347 (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Fludd's work is important and appropriate to be put down on the perception article.
- Alan347 (talk) 09:21, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Why? --Morton Shumway (talk) 13:03, 24 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Ok. Thanks. God Bless You. Alan347 (talk) 21:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, very much, for your kind words at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Church of Scientology editing on Wikipedia about my work on the article. Much appreciated. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 14:32, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks—it was my pleasure. Best, Morton Shumway (talk) 14:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]
2011
Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from 69.21.32.122. We wanted to let you know that the case has been opened and is currently under investigation. Acather96 (talk) 09:28, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, can we be adult about this? Don't we agree that perception involves an inter-relation of physical (through the senses), imaginative(image), intellectual(the good, the beautiful) and sensible(making sense of fact)? Alan347 (talk) 19:34, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Our disagreement is not whether perception is a purely physical phenomenon or not, but about the use of a particular image with a certain caption. Before, it was about particular edits to the article in question. I have more than one time tried to open an "adult" discussion, viz. about encyclopedism, writing on Wikipedia, style, content, however you reacted in a rather ignorant manner. Morton Shumway—talk 21:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]
An article that you have been involved in editing, Cognitive neuroscience of music, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Morton Shumway—talk 21:53, 25 February 2011 (UTC) ; )[reply]
Morton, I think you're overdue for this:
- Oh my, how nice of you, Martin! – Thank you very much. Also: it's always a pleasure meeting you. Best, Morton Shumway—talk 17:03, 15 April 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Thanks for the notification - Oops. I just wanted the links to go to the section where they were mentioned. You are right, it should have gone to Process and terminology - I will make the change (20040302 (talk) 11:30, 5 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]
- Good to hear, thank you! Morton Shumway—talk 15:34, 5 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]
- Since you are aware of those redirects ('Proximal stimulus and Distal stimulus), maybe you can find a reference for those terms from somewhere? A quick google didn't really do much more than point back to WP. (20040302 (talk))
- When the right moment comes I am sure I can produce a number of sensible references – I just don't have the capacity to edit a lot at the moment. Kind regards, Morton Shumway—talk 19:08, 5 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Hi! I'm a first-year PhD student working on a system to help improve the quality of Wikipedia articles on scientific topics by providing easier access to relevant scientific publications. I was hoping to speak with some editors who work on scientific articles in order to solicit requirements for my system in order to better satisfy the needs of the Wikipedia community. I noticed that you have been a caretaker for a number of pages on topics concerning cognitive science and philosophy, and I would really appreciate your input. If you are interested, please let me know on my talk page (talk). Thanks! —Preceding undated comment added 23:20, 27 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Hi Morton! Thanks so much for agreeing to help - I decided the easiest way to handle this would be to just post questions on my talk page. Would really appreciate your input - thanks! Sanjaykairam (talk) 02:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
