This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Since you haven't been welcomed yet...
Welcome!
Hello, Alcmaeonid, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place ((helpme))
before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Lisatwo 18:43, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Space Cadet 02:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Space Cadet 15:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, sorry, one or two of my edits should not have been marked as minor. Have a good day.Andycjp (talk) 01:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Ongoing random thoughts. Feel free to add your own.
Hi - I have reviewed and declined to speedily delete Cristian Fleming. The article asserts notability through an international tour. In order to be speedily deleted, a page about a musician must not meet any of the criteria listed at WP:MUSIC. You should feel free to list this at articles for deletion, but a speedy deletion is not appropriate in this case. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me on my talk page. - Philippe | Talk 22:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
It's almost done: Glossary of philosophical isms.
By the way, welcome to the Philosophy WikiProject! The Transhumanist 04:30, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I am a strong Wikipedia supporter and enjoy trying to contribute but am a rank amateur. My comment on psychologists was intended to provide clickable access to an alternate view of induction and how experience may function biologically. Would quoting the work of Skinner or Hebb be appropriate or is referring to psychology in general a no no in philosophy? Lrunge (talk) 11:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks for your helpful comments. I shall make my contributions more specific and realize that referring to ideas broadly is not all that helpful. Lrunge (talk) 13:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Regarding Hume's view on racism, can you please add your thought on the discussion page before deleting content? Thank you. Serkalem (talk) 15:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I think you should be aware that if our dispute is not resolved, I intend to put a POV tag on the article and delist it as GA. An article cannot be good if it is not honest. Haiduc (talk) 21:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello Alcmaeonid.
I have notice that you revert a lot of vandalism. Have you heard of rollback before? It allows a user to revert vandalism much faster than by undo-ing it. I think you should ask for it. I am not an admin, or I would give it to you myself. I wrote this just to let you know about the existence of rollback because before someone randomly gave it to me, I did not know it existed. If you ask for it, you should have no problem getting it, as you clearly have an excellent grasp of what constitutes vandalism. Good luck, and may the vandals fail... J.delanoygabsadds 17:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
You asked for a page number for the references on Koestler's misogyny. As far as I can recall, Cesarani mentions this on a number of occasions in the book. I don't know which would be suitable, but it is one of Cesarani's recurring themes, along with the idea that AK was a Jew in denial. --MacRusgail (talk) 15:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I reverted your edit to Allegory of the cave since you seem to have replaced a large block of text with an "a". Perhaps you had some reason to remove the block of text and the "a" was a typo? --Pleasantville (talk) 15:11, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your recent help with Cangrande della Scala and other relevant Italian condottieriarticles. As you maybe noticed, I wrote or improved most of them. Thanks and good work. --Attilios (talk) 19:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
As a leading editor of Ernest Hemingway, please see Talk:Ernest Hemingway/GA1.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Im sorry for that im not sure what ive left that message for but i am sorry for the inconvenice hda3ku (talk) 02:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I created an image and added it to the page, but it has been removed because it doesn't correctly illustrate the allegory. Personally I think it does, but you might want to voice an opinion on the talk page. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 07:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Gu Alcmaeonid, I dug out my Ernest Hemingway books and left a post at Talk:Ernest_Hemingway#Restoration about some ideas for how to work on the article. You'd expressed interest at the recent Good Article Review... If you're still interested and have access to some good books, or just have some good ideas, or whatever else, please share whatever you've got! Should be fun too. (And the article is semi-protected from vandalism until at least January--I just noticed it hadn't been edited in over a week!) Cheers, --JayHenry (talk) 04:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Megacles or Cleisthenes or whichever of those accursed and polluted Alcmaeonids you might be! Greetings. You posted on my Talk Page a rebuke about my multiple edits. Yes I plead guilty to having a trigger-happy finger when it comes to saving my edits. It's a habit I developed after numerous accidental edit clashes - I hate seeing my hard work disappear without trace when somebody edits the article with a piffling alteration before I can finish my own, more considered edit! I might try to control myself a little better in future - but an Alcmaeonid really has no business lecturing others about right behaviour. To misquote Yeats a little:
Thanks for uploading Image:Psychopathy checklist manual.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:53, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
With respect, it's not enough to change the sentence: the note has to be sourced. Clearly, you know where it comes from, so it's a matter of adding that. qp10qp (talk) 19:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
The next Connecticut Wikipedia meetup will take place sometime during April 2009 at Real Art Ways cafe and arts center in Hartford, Connecticut. Please list on the meetup page whether or not you can go. Also please contribute ideas for topics and dates! Hope to see you there!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
The 2nd Connecticute Meetup will take place on April 18th, 2009 at Real Art Ways cafe and arts center in Hartford, Connecticut. Please state whether or not you can attend on the meetup page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) because your name was on the invite list. 16:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I want to thank you for that vote of support on the talk page. I was astonished as you were by the interpretation put on my edit by the other A. Then Haiduc posted his next edit and it included some very uncharacteristic concessions, which astonished me even more. I concluded then that the other A is working with Haiduc behind the scenes, which could be a good thing if it leads Haiduc to a more realistic position. However, I'm now looking at the fine print in Haiduc's edit and I can see that there are a lot of strings attached (e.g. his Plutarch quote includes another reference to Solon's alleged pederasty laws). So there are still some unresolved self-contradictions in the section and it invites further editing. If Haiduc is prepared to be realistic, he will follow through with my suggestions about those further edits because this will help stabilize the article. If he doesn't, I'll be interested to see how the other A responds. If nothing is done, we are left with an article that still looks as if somebody is trying to sneak into it a pro-pederastic message - which is a recipe for more vandalism. Wikipedia is certainly an interesting experiment - I wonder if it will still be around in ten years? Lucretius (talk) 22:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for all this. Yes I thought the Scanlon book must be iffy - the claim within it that Solon had certainly legislated pederastic reform to some extent is clearly an iffy kind of statement, especially in the context of most other scholarship. However I don't think the latest round of edits has really changed anything - the average reader who gets that far in the article will probably still conclude that the sexual theme is much ado about nothing. A joke by a comic dramatist, a bit of maudlin conjecture by an author of imaginative biographies, and a mere inference from an orator's speech - this might amount to something for a one issue editor but most people are rational beings. H wants to bring pederasty under the banner of Gay Rights. Gays have to stop him doing this. Nowadays teachers and policeman can openly acknowledge their homosexuality but nobody openly declares himself to be a pederast. Yet H continues to accuse people of homophobia just because they resent his propaganda. Lucretius (talk) 22:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
((cite journal))
: Check date values in: |date=
(help)
((cite journal))
: Check date values in: |date=
(help)
((cite journal))
: Check date values in: |date=
(help)
((cite journal))
: Check date values in: |date=
(help)
Thanks for uploading File:My Dinner With Andre dvd cover.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like ((PD-self)) (to release all rights), ((self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL))
(to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Sorry I am not happy about your photo of the B Traven site and in particular the caption.
You say 'reliably thought'. The source you give is 1948, over 60 years ago - The article by Dwight Whitney was big news then but it is more than a little dated now. This should be clear from the article, but you do not seem to have read it.
Firstly, B Traven is a pen-name - not a name used in everyday life. The authorship question is 'who was the man who wrote under the name B Traven ?'. So I presume the caption means that the photo is 'the only known photo of the man who wrote under the name B Traven'. This is not true. The man in the photo has been photographed many times. Whether he is the Traven author is open to question, but I think almost everyone accepts he is.
Let me explain - all the evidence suggests that The B Traven author is an individual who variously went under the names of Hal Croves, Traven Torsvan and Ret Marut. In fact the Croves/Traven identification was the point of Whitney's article. The photo you show was in 1948 one of the few photos of this man, and is taken when he was calling himself Traven Torsvan. Since then however, we have learned much more and many more photos are available. In fact there is even some film of him. And he appears as an extra in one scene of Treasure of Sierra Madre.
I am changing your caption and I hope we can leave it there.
Thank you
--John Price (talk) 21:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:My Dinner With Andre dvd cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 01:32, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
The piece I added and is removed by Wikipaedia as "Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Hare Psychopathy Checklist, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ~ Alcmaeonid (talk) 18:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC) (and previous dates)" This is not my personal view. It is written by a famous psychiatrist Dr Bob Johnson (psychiatrist). I am a mathematician and have not any personal or non-personal idea regarding PCL-R, (except that it is a piece of irrelevant pathological science and I have not declared this private personal view here) and I am not committed to analyse such subject matters. Only in compliance to wikipedia policy in allowing criticism of controversial ideas in an academic and polite manner and far from intimidation and libelling I added word by word from Dr Bob Johnson (psychiatrist)'s peer reviewed article with full links and publicly available pdf of its reference. Please do not block me. I didn't notice your previous messages. I only became surprised how some one diligently suppresses this few lines of criticism from a very controversial subject regarding liberty and jurisdiction in free democratic societies. Dr Bob Johnson has worked in capacity of head psychiatrist in penal system in Great Britain. Ref: Dr Bob Johnson [5] An analysis of medical and legal flaws in the PCL-R [6]. Gentlemen, may I ask you as a matter of neutrality put back these few lines of criticism?
Peter Jones --PeterJones1380 (talk) 20:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterJones1380 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charles_Sanders_Peirce&diff=290991630&oldid=290936963 The Tetrast (talk) 18:21, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
2KB reduction according to the article history (which doesn't reflect large size of "Logic" template removed from bottom while adding "Logic" link among the "See also" links). The Tetrast (talk) 18:30, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Consolidated "References" into the footnotes. Reduction by almost 6KB. Some of the references no longer referred to anything in the article. Last parts of wiki now generally looking rather smaller. The Tetrast (talk) 22:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
The Link Farm template refers to "External links" but you placed it above "See also" so I have assumed that your edit remark "this section is now over the edge" referred to the "See also" to which somebody had just added a bunch of links to Statistics wikis. Anyway:
At this point I think I have done way more than enough, given that you added the "Link farm" template over "See also" and that you said "this section is now over the edge", presumably referring to the recent addition of a Statistics links subsection. I've certainly pulled the article back from over the edge and pulled it back further than that. As a whole the article is now over 8 KB smaller, mostly through reductions of the final sections, and that doesn't even reflect the removal of the big "Logic" links section which doesn't get measured by the Wiki software except in terms of the tiny 9-byte "Logic" template. The Tetrast (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
As the GAR reviewer, I am informing you that David Hume, an article that you worked on, was delisted in GA sweeps process. My suggestions are available on the GAR page. Hope they are useful for article improvement.--Redtigerxyz Talk 06:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Alcmaeonid. There is a debate about keeping/deleting an article titled Greek Love. As an intelligent man, you'll know by the title what the problem is. Unfortunately, intelligence is a commodity that is in scant supply in debates of this kind. Never the less, you might want to piss against the wind. I have done my bit. The discussion is here [7]. Good luck. Esseinrebusinanetamenfatearenecessest (talk) 02:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Too late now - the article has been endorsed by an overwhelming vote. Yet nobody knows what it is about. The article was started a couple of years ago by a highly nuanced scholar who still hasn't worked out its subject area (something to do with homosexuality, pederasty, male bonding in ancient Greece and Victorian England) and meanwhile the satyrs are licking their lips in anticipation of a carnival. Oh well, it could be good material for a satire some day. Esseinrebusinanetamenfatearenecessest (talk) 03:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I have conducted a reassessment of this article's GA status. I have placed the reassessment on hold as there are some points to be addressed at Talk:Either/Or/GA1#GA_Reassessment. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:12, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I will wait for your return before going further, please take a look at the article talk page so that we can settle this question regarding his eromenos. Regards, Haiduc (talk) 16:33, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm getting pretty sick of the constant edit reverting on the main Herodotus article. It's fairly obvious that you disagree with each others stance and are unlikely to ever find common ground. That said, I am going to ask that you try and come to some workable conclusion on the talk page without editing and reverting the main article. If this is impossible, I think I'm going to ask an admin to come in and sort this out. I've posted this on your talk pages too, just in case your not watching this page. Fol de rol troll (talk) 12:57, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello Alcmaeonid. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Dylan Thomas Sprouse, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: User does exist. Thank you. Nancy talk 16:32, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Can you provide some evidence to back your statement, "I would like to move forward and restore the list which I believe is being held up, in part, by a political agenda." I'm not aware of anyone expressing a political agenda, but then I've not looked into the full history of this dispute. --Ronz (talk) 16:49, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
As you have commented in an ANI thread or RfC relating to User:Pedant17, this is to notify you that the same user's conduct is being discussed here, along with sanction proposals. Ncmvocalist (talk) 13:19, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Treasure of the Sierra Madre book cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
((bots|deny=DASHBot))
to your talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:42, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, thanks
This user helped promote Ernest Hemingway to featured article status. |
--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Just noticed your name on one of my watchlist articles - nice to see you back in the saddle! I'm still on the verge of going/coming (I always seem to be thereabouts). Good editing, good luck and watch out for the bandits! McZeus (talk) 22:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Please don't revert my edits on the Nietzsche page about his influence on Freud and Jung. Freud and Jung are two of the biggest names in psychology and you will even read them sometimes in philosophy, though mostly Freud. Jung had a seminar on Nietzsche. --96.253.50.139 (talk) 00:43, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Alcmaeonid, unfortunately I've had to remove the link that you added to Notturno (Schubert). It's a beautiful recording, but it's a copyright violation - see the source address on the site you linked - so it should not be linked in Wikipedia. Graham87 12:48, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to WikiProject Novels, we don't have very many active contributer right now in the group, so we could always use some more help. We have several backlogs that are in need of work, first and foremost we have our Assessment backlog which can always use some more help (make sure you check categories and formatting while you are assessing). Also, we have a a long list of articles with cleanup tags that can always use some more work. We held two collaboration earlier in the year, which can be found at Wikipedia:Novels/Collaboration and we may hold another in the coming months. Make sure that you add the collaborations page, the assessment page and the project talk page to your watchlist and we can see if anything comes up. If you need any help, feel free to ask, and I am more than willing to help on any project of yours. Happy editing! Sadads (talk) 10:41, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Alcmaeonid, you neglected to alert me about the above-linked discussion you started a while back. :) As such, sorry for the belated response. I'll see what I can find to replace the disputed image. María (habla conmigo) 18:45, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Your great contribution to Wikipedia (an Wikisource) is appreciated! Stan J. Klimas (talk) 02:15, 23 July 2011 (UTC) |
Thank you for the heads-up on edit summaries. I'd like to introduce myself and let you know I'm not a troll or a vandal, but am an editing newbie, so I hope you'll be patient as I get up to speed. I do catch on quickly, though, so hopefully you won't have to admonish me to pull my socks up too often. I did go back and submit a very condensed edit summary for Moby-Dick, since I figured if I went back and annotated each edit I made it would pile a huge bunch of new edits on top of what I did on August 10th. Please let me know if you'd like me to go back and address each one, or if this last (with a mea culpa for not doing it right in the first place) will suffice.
Re Moby-Dick, I did start out with "minor edits", hoping to clean up the format of the page re consistency for quotes, titles, etc., and then the more I worked on it, the more I saw factual errors, such as the claim that Melville had read the account of the Essex prior to his meeting Chase's son (which a direct quote from Melville refutes). That would've driven me nuts if I'd left them alone - so, um, I didn't. I realize those changes were more than minor, but I was intimidated by the semi-protected status of the page and didn't know whether anything outside of minor edits would be accepted, and I did have some info to add that I hoped would improve the page. I did see your note attached to the footnote re the 1901 sinking of the "Kathleen" questioning the date - that was the correct date, which meant that it was completely irrelevant to the entry. So I was encouraged to include the "Ann Alexander" sinking, which is certainly topical and which Melville certainly knew about.
In a previous entries I edited, about Trans-Lux, I do see where I went wrong in terms of guidelines and formatting, and I'll go back and clean that up. Artsunlimited (talk) 04:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)artsunlimited
A little encouragement is a dangerous thing! I edited the Ann Alexander page which had only a bare-bones account (and part of that lifted in its entirety from an internet source, which made it sound like the ship was some sort of floating rescue commissary at Trafalgar, which was decidely not the case). I cited the original sources for the corrected/expanded early history and a contemporary source that reported the captain and seveeral seamen's account of the attack. (It happens to be the NY Times, a paper of record. A little florid and relying heavily on the Panama Herald, but given the times and the sensational nature of the event, that's understandable.) I also added some current theory as to why bull whales attack in the first place. Other than needing a decent link for the Moby-Dick edit I'd done peviously, I really wanted to remedy this online comment at "Whales and Weiner Dogs" http://whalesandwienerdogs.com/blog1/2009/04/20/the-essex-wasnt-the-only-whaleship-stove-by-a-whale-there-was-also-the-ann-alexander/:
"The Ann Alexander actually has a really terrible wikipedia entry. It’s only a few lines long, and it says that the “sinking of the ship may have contributed to the success of Herman Melville’s book Moby-Dick.” Here’s the thing, though, Moby Dick wasn’t successful, at least not in Melville’s lifetime."
Hopefully the blog's author will be moved to amend that critique.Artsunlimited (talk) 05:08, 16 August 2011 (UTC)artsunlimited
I went back and redited, re-linked and re-cited this entry. Now, can you tell me if the admonishment box (heh) at the top is removed automatically when criteria is met, or does the page need some sort of peer review to pass muster?
Also, I'm getting a red 'missing a "ref" template' error on the "Pequod" page, which I've been trying to improve - is this something that needs to be remedied higher up? Because after fiddling around I'm darned if I can see how I can provide one.Artsunlimited (talk) 19:52, 17 August 2011 (UTC)artsunlimited
Hmmm...I did delete a tag that read "unreferenced", and inserted the heading, thinking that might give the citations a place to go, but it still gave me that error message. It may have cleaned up the problem as the error has now vanished. The error message forwarded me to some site that had a number of pages missing this template, the "Pequod" being one, and advising that some sort of bot, which hadn't run in a few months, was supposed to do something or other. Anyway, that's when I stopped messing with it, but I'm perfectly prepared to take full credit. I did figure out how to remove the template re Trans Lux, hopefully future editors agree with my assessment. Beats the days when the initial author credited the company's founding to Thomas Edison!Artsunlimited (talk) 20:01, 18 August 2011 (UTC)artsunlimited
Regarding this, I didn't revert the edit because I didn't notice the extraneous text. I was focusing on another section entirely.--~TPW 13:15, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi again! I would like to edit Template:Herman Melville to reflect the fact that Typee, Omoo, White Jacket are Travel literature, not novels. Actually they are more travel adventure or memoirs, but I don't see this category. Typee and Omoo are already listed in the Travel literature article, but I would request an administrator to revise the links across Wikipedia to reflect the change. Unless you or somebody have a better idea, I will go ahead in a week or so. Cheers. ch (talk) 06:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
I read on your user page that you would like volunteers to proofread some texts and I should like to volunteer. I'm not sure quite what is involved but I think I am a careful reader - I don't have German, I'm hoping you meant volunteers to read English translations. Please let me know if you think I can help at all - Thanks. Sayerslle (talk) 17:07, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
How do I go about getting Otium reassessed to possible B-Class and getting a higher assessment of "importance"?--Doug Coldwell talk 16:00, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Regarding your warnings at User talk:66.194.51.34, do you know for certain that any of the sources the IP is adding are fabricated or false? I have a hunch that they may just be pulling up and quoting related biographies through a Google books search, and that the sources don't actually support the material added. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 18:30, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
As a former PhD philosophy candidate who never finished but has 8 years of philosophy I'd like to contribute to some of Schopenhauer's works as you request if there is need for any help. Please be specific though, because there is a lot of information.MontyMee (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:23, 21 November 2011 (UTC).
h — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.191.65.66 (talk) 21:51, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am an editor of Wikipedia in Portuguese and I just started to edit here. In cases like this, how do I find the warning vandalism templates about and where can I send it for sysops?
Willy Weazley 15:41, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
New England Wikimedia General Meeting | ||
---|---|---|
The New England Wikimedia General Meeting will be a large-scale meetup of all Wikimedians (and friends) from the New England area in order to discuss regional coordination and possible formalization of our community (i.e., a chapter). Come hang out with other Wikimedians, learn more about ongoing activities, and help plan for the future!
| ||
|
| |
Please sign up here: Wikipedia:Meetup/New England! |
Message delivered by Dominic at 08:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.