This page 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. |
Hi. I think that you are correct, and that the original passage is not only right, but also important, historically. My point is not that it was not unusual for one to buy one's way out of prison. But rather that it's unsourced. If there's a source, I'd support including it. Llamabr (talk) 02:38, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello RJC
I apologize, but the first thing which I should have done, is to introduce myself: even if it is a worsening fact, I am indeed related to the site for which I have established links… but I never sought to hide it. I did not consider only one second to make spam, and by the way, I went too quickly… however I know well the rules of wikipedia and I rather easily imagine the problems which the “external links” might create for those who have the difficult burden to fight against the abuses.
Information that I give is relevant, namely that a whole of free audio books on the author sought by the Net surfer is accessible on our site. As well as those of Librivox (who are doing an excellent work) or Ebook of the Gutenberg project , our philosophy is close (even if we are smaller) and our process is going in the same direction. The only difference is the language and I thought (and I always think) that,since it's here all about famous French-speaking authors, the possibility of finding, through a simple click, audio versions in the original language was legitimate and enriching pieces of information for all those who wish to learn the language… or quite simply to go close to the original text.
It would be, perhaps, interesting to have the opinion of other English-speaking "wikipedians", before definitively solving this issue ?
Yours sincerely, Frederic
--Frederic420 (talk) 20:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the information Rjc !
So now i know the particular rules for the non-english external links.
It’s seems like normal for Louis Pergaud.
But not really for athe other links, i will see …
Thanks again.
--Frederic420 (talk) 13:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Meno's slave-boy is a house slave, not a slave working in the fields . It is unfortunate that the "actually existing" article house slave is restricted to U.S. slavery, as opposed to a global perspective (as is English WP policy). Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk) 14:19, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
You were right to rollback my last edit on national liberalism: sorry about that. However, as far as I know Wikipolitique, even if it is based on a wiki platfrom, is a website by a respected French journalist and he is the only editor of the website. I consider it a reliable source. --Checco (talk) 18:38, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, it was not me who wrote http://theunitedpersons.org/blog/jus-naturale-jus-gentium-jus-civile : it was exclusively(!) Gaius, Ulpianus and Iustinianus. Pls check the post and its references. Thank you: P. Mazsa (talk) 00:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello RJC, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Angerfist - a page you tagged - because: Dozens of interwiki, Mutilate charted. Suggest using AfD if deletion is to be pursued. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. decltype
(talk) 18:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting my reversion at Plato — I'd missed the edit comment and, as you point out, it is just an unsupported opinion.
All the best. –Syncategoremata (talk) 20:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
RJC (talk), thank you so much for the warm welcome. Sorry for missing the summary field. I will do my greatest to fill it out, at all times. Cheers.DelianDiver (talk) 13:59, 22 May 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)
There are a few other articles out there like the bio of Jeffrey_Herebener: possible Mises Institute vanity pages for non-notable academics with WP:PROF and WP:UNDUE problems. One more, that of Jörg Guido Hülsmann has been nominated for deletion. After having seen your constructive input in the Herebener discussion, I thought I'd post this message here. Thanks Bkalafut (talk) 01:47, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, can you vote here please? Thank you. DreamNight (talk) 13:32, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi RJC, forgive me for being blunt but I can't see how you can regard offering a book for free as 'advertising' or promotional in nature. The commons-based approach adopted by Wikipedia actually inspired me to create the Society for Open Digital Literature; a place where talented writers can offer their work for free online. It is non-profit and has been crafted with the same philosophy as Wikipedia, so I am struggling to find a basis for why it has been rejected. Semaj Iksvoklisov (talk) 08:39, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi RJC, reading the LINKSPAM section, I can see how it might be frowned upon to simply add a book on the external references section just because it is relevant to the subject; my mistake. I would still like to improve the wikipedia entries on 'Sun Tzu' and 'The Art of War' with references from the book. A lot of research has gone into it and I would be more than happy to contribute. Would that be in line with Wikipedia's rules? Semaj Iksvoklisov (talk) 06:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi RJC, I had a read of the welcome menu you added to my talk page and I made another contribution. I hoping this one will be more in line than my previous entry :) Semaj Iksvoklisov (talk) 06:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
If you're not going to contribute constructively to the conversation than can you please not contribute at all. Thank you. Soxwon (talk) 21:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
RJC, I've started the RfC regarding MMfA, MRC, FAIR, Newsbusters etc. at WP:RS. (Wow, that's a lot of acronyms.) Please continue to participate on the Reliable Sources Talk page here. Skoal. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 21:32, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion on Temple's reliability here. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 08:42, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
I have proposed an edit for the mainspace of an important Wikipedia policy, the Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources policy. Essentially, I believe that some sources are so partisan that using them as "reliable sources" invites more problems than they're really worth. You've previously participated in the RfC on this subject, or another related discussion indicating that you are interested in this important policy area. Please indicate here whether you support or oppose the proposed edit. The original discussion is here. Thanks. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 01:48, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
I created a request for mediation here. Please offer your comments. --Mcorazao (talk) 14:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Edit warring over cleanup templates. Thank you. SnottyWong soliloquize 22:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC)