User talk:AscendedAnathema

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello AscendedAnathema, welcome to Wikipedia!

I noticed nobody had said hi yet... Hi!

If you feel a change is needed, feel free to make it yourself! Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone (yourself included) can edit any article by following the Edit this page link. Wikipedia convention is to be bold and not be afraid of making mistakes. If you're not sure how editing works, have a look at How to edit a page, or try out the Sandbox to test your editing skills.

You might like some of these links and tips:

If, for some reason, you are unable to fix a problem yourself, feel free to ask someone else to do it. Wikipedia has a vibrant community of contributors who have a wide range of skills and specialties, and many of them would be glad to help. As well as the wiki community pages there are IRC Channels, where you are more than welcome to ask for assistance.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Thanks and happy editing, -- Alf melmac 22:44, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise

What was wrong with the compromise I proposed in declaring that this is a theory? For someone who reads Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand, I am extremely surprised that you would find this an acceptable label to simply declare as fact, despite the controversy and lack of self-identification. Tfine80 05:46, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

If you are familiar with Rand's ideas, you would understand how I feel about compromise and consensus. If not, don't use her in an argument against me. Also, Friedman is more commonly associated with monetarism than neoliberalism, although his views are consistent with the latter. The lack of someone labeling themselves and their ideas with a certain "ism" does not exclude that person or idea from being associated with that particular "ism" when their works and beliefs are consistent with those of the "ism." AscendedAnathema 21:56, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Rand would hate the term neoliberalism and detest the leftists who use it to indict trade liberalization. And, yes, the fact some disagree with the label means that it is not proper to assign it definitively if substantial controversy exists. That is my point. Compromise is simply how Wikipedia functions. If there is substantial disagreement on the use of a label, the controversy needs to be discussed within the article. That is the essential component of Wikipedia:NPOV Tfine80 23:50, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
I seriously doubt that Rand would hate the term of neoliberalism if she were alive today, considering she acknowledged that her political thought was largely within the traditional realm of classical liberalism and would probably acknowledge that the word "neoliberalism" in its economic context reflects the new economic realities which have come about as a result of globalization. Also, considering that there seems to be only one source of dissension over the applicability of use of "neoliberal" in the context of recent US macroeconomic policy, I would hardly consider there to be "substantial disagreement" on the issue. AscendedAnathema 00:29, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
You honestly believe she would adopt a term that is mostly used as a pejorative by her enemies (and as you describe it automatically redefine it in a novel way)? Don't you think to prove this meets the consensus standards of NPOV, you would need to find an agent of US government, Greenspan or Rubin perhaps, actually endorse the term? I can't find this anywhere; this determination would be hugely controversial. The point about classical liberalism indicates that she would probably find the neo- prefix silly and mostly designed to smear traditionally liberal thinkers with a patronizing term. Tfine80 04:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Considering the word "capitalist" itself was first used by Marx and Engels in the Communist Manifesto, I have no doubt that she would have considered adopting the term. However, arguing the semantics of potential labels not ever used by a long-dead woman is pointless hearsay. At any rate, if you can demonstrate how the macroeconomic and fiscal policy of the United States has not been increasingly influenced by neoliberal economic ideals since the 1980s as defined by the neoliberalism page itself, then I will concede the argument and stop reverting the introduction of the US economy page. Otherwise you're the only one complaining, and as I have almost as little will to argue over the hypothetical semantics of a dead Ayn Rand as I do to argue over the supposedly "hugely controversial" use of neoliberal that only one person seems to find hugely controversial. AscendedAnathema 04:24, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Insult

We cannot include an insult in a wiki article. I propose not to have it untill the pool ends.

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Ap France cartoon controversy Muslim protests 03feb06 210.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ap France cartoon controversy Muslim protests 03feb06 210.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. -SCEhardT 21:50, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lego Muhammed

Nice! Have you seen this: http://www.thebricktestament.com/ Smiling is addictive. :D Kyaa the Catlord 07:53, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] king and king

i created the areticle, and i never added any personal commentary, i actaully followed the suggestion of merging it into controversy Ascended Anathema plus i read it on the reviews on amazon.com when i made the article, check the links. i dont know how the properly cite so yeah, what?

but the book does have illustrations that are not at par with other childrens books, they are differant and tacky its not editorialized

(these comments unsigned by Qrc2006)

[edit] Nottingham

  • Just to let you know, High Pavement College is a sixth form college in north Nottingham, and Harold Shipman is the worst serial killer in UK history, so the edit you reverted as nonsense wasn't nonsense, just badly written by someone who assumed everyone looking at the Nottingham article had heard of Shipman. Average Earthman 06:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
My apologies. I was doing some quick recent changes patrolling and assumed it was just more inane nonsense put in by an anonymous user. AscendedAnathema 21:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sing Pages

why dont you sing your pages with tildes you silly salamander i dont like you your a big meanie and i think that you are rude and stop saying POC and other thingies i dont know what is they are confuse me explain them and speak englesh ok favor? i dont feel like signing my pages ok SS (Silly Salamander) i think SS like you need lots of hugs cuz tehre moma dint give thme enough i amnt put with that ok funky SS (unsigned by Qrc2006)

lol sorry about the dumb shit i wrote and whatnot, just keep off my territory. LOL you're gay! Qrc2006 21:18, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

what immature comments? your a dude too, your a gay dude. GO TEAM RAINBOW, seriously. actually im an 19yo bi college student and im pretty damn hot and pleased with myself, [myspace.com/whitelatinomuttqt (check out my myspace)] and am bored and am sillily quipping with you back and forth between classes and during the boring ones too hahah, and im just sayin king & king is my baby so could you like not delete stuff off it before im even done working it out i mean ive done most of the shit on there not that i dont appreciate that youve contributed and edited and reformetted it just comes off as vendettaed. Qrc2006 22:34, 5 May 2006 (UTC) peace


hey there hows it going today? its a bright and shinny day today in Oakland! But yeah hope your doing well. lol i was reading your arguments on Ayn Rand, funny. your hella smart ya know that. how old r u? r u cute?

[edit] Valpo revision

Your revert removed the end of the valpo page. I tried to correct that, and clean up some of the ip address editting, but I didn't restore any removed paragraphs. Can you take another look at it? Dstanfor 20:09, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image tagging for Image:Stolibottle.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Stolibottle.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Confusing edit summary

This edit claims to fix a link, but does nothing of the sort. In fact, it removes material from the article. What's going on here? Was this just a cut-and-paste screw-up in the edit summary? And, if so, why was the material removed? - Jmabel | Talk 00:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

If you look at the end of the brainyquote address, you will see a closing "]" missing before my edit. This is what I was reffering to in my edit summary. AscendedAnathema 00:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
OK, it fixes a link (which I hadn't noticed), but more significantly it removes the sentence "He acknowledged, however, that in 37 years of military and reserve service he had not personally known any openly homosexual service members," which certainly seems to me like a more significant edit, and more worthy of comment, than fixing a link. Or have I missed something? - Jmabel | Talk 02:21, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/s/c/User_talk%7EAscendedAnathema_e47b.html"